Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 502

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Do Organizational Practices Matter in Role Stress Processes? A Study of Direct and Moderating Effects for Marketing-Oriented Boundary Spanners

Open access
Singh, Jagdip, Verbeke, Willem, Rhoads, Gary K.·1996·Journal of Marketing

Abstract

Previous research and meta-analyses suggest that the influence of organizational variables on boundary role stress processes is weak and marginal. Using the emerging work in organizational practices and configurations, the authors reexamine this relationship by addressing three critical gaps: (1) conceptualizing organizational environment as a multidimensional practices construct, (2) operationalizing the organizational environment as configurations or combinations of practices dimensions, and (3) testing for direct and moderating hypotheses. The results reveal that organizational practices matter significantly in boundary role stress processes. The findings show that procedural environments are dysfunctional because they engender higher levels of role stressors, reduce performance, and negatively affect the psychological well-being of boundary spanners. In contrast, the achievement and affective-oriented environments involve distinct trade-offs, because none is clearly superior. The authors discuss the theoretical implications for further research and provide recommendations for managerial practice.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/002224299606000305

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 502

Metadata

Authors
Singh, J., Verbeke, W., & Rhoads, G. K.
Venue
Journal of Marketing
Published
1996-07
Volume
60
Issue
3
Pages
69-86
ISSN
  • 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-7185
OpenAlex
W2027784974
Cited by
502
References
4
FWCI
7.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.