Cited by 114Innovation and Knowledge ManagementManagement and Organizational StudiesInnovative Education and Learning Practices

The Effect of Employer Networks on Workplace Innovation and Training

Erickson, Christopher L., Jacoby, Sanford M.·2003·ILR Review

Abstract

If innovative work practices improve performance, why does the intensity of their adoption vary substantially across establishments? Following a lead suggested by some sociological studies, the authors empirically investigate the role of social networks (ties to other organizations) in the organizational learning associated with diffusion of innovative work practices. Using establishment data on formal affiliation and other network measures, they find that managerial participation in networks—specifically, in industry and cross-industry associations, civic organizations, and the internal networks of multi-unit firms—positively affected both the probability that high-performance work practices and employee training programs would be adopted and, where they were adopted, the intensity of their adoption. Furthermore, multiple affiliations raised the likelihood that an establishment would pursue an intensive approach to work reorganization and training.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/001979390305600201

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Networks are equally important for learning about innovative work practices that other organisations have developed or adopted.

    “Networks are not only critical for accessing knowledge to create in-house innovations or for the diffusion of technological innovation but they are equally important for learning about innovative work practices that other organisations have developed or adopted (Erickson and Jacoby, 2003).”

    From Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence (2004) · cites this paper as Erickson and Jacoby, 2003

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Erickson, C. L., & Jacoby, S. M.
Venue
ILR Review
Published
2003-01
Volume
56
Issue
2
Pages
203-223
ISSN
  • 0019-7939 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-271X
OpenAlex
W2134580592
Cited by
114
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 12
FWCI
15.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Industrial and Labor Relations Review (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Innovative Education and Learning Practices
Keywords
workplace innovation, high-performance work practices, employee training programs, organizational learning, diffusion of innovations, trade associations, civic organizations, multi-unit firms, work reorganization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review