The DOI matches its Crossref record; 123 of the 123 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Coping with Problems of Understanding in Interorganizational Relationships: Using Formalization as a Means to Make Sense
Abstract
Research into the management of interorganizational relationships has hitherto primarily focused on problems of coordination, control, and to a lesser extent, legitimacy. In this article, we assert that partners cooperating in such relationships are also confronted with ‘problems of understanding’. Such problems arise from differences between partners in terms of culture, experience, structure and industry, and from the uncertainty and ambiguity that participants in interorganizational relationships experience in early stages of collaboration. Building on Karl Weick’s theory of sensemaking, we advance that participants in interorganizational relationships use formalization as a means to make sense of their partners, the interorganizational relationships in which they are engaged and the contexts in which these are embedded so as to diminish problems of understanding. We offer a systematic overview of the mechanisms through which formalization facilitates sensemaking, including: (1) focusing participants’ attention; (2) provoking articulation, deliberation and reflection; (3) instigating and maintaining interaction; and (4) reducing judgement errors and individual biases, and diminishing the incompleteness and inconsistency of cognitive representations. In this way, the article contributes to a better understanding of the relationships between formalization and sensemaking in collaborative relationships, and it carries Karl Weick’s thinking on the relationship between sense-making and organizing forward in the context of interorganizational management.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“Implication 2: Collaboration refers to voluntarily helping other partners to achieve IOR (common) goals or one or more of their private goals.”
From Collaboration, Coordination, and Cooperation Among Organizations: Establishing the Distinctive Meanings of These Terms Through a Systematic Literature Review (2020) · cites this paper as Vlaar, Van Den Bosch, & Volberda, 2006
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
Gioia, D. A., Mehra, A., & Weick, K. E. (1996) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259169 · Cited by 15,614
The Economic Institutions of Capitalism
Dugger, W. M. (1987) · Journal of Economic Issues · doi:10.1080/00213624.1987.11504638 · Cited by 14,786
The Social Psychology of Organizations.
Hackman, J. R., Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2989929 · Cited by 12,235
(1993) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/0002-8223(93)92196-5 · Cited by 11,976
(1969) · Virtual Defense Library (Ministerio de Defensa) · Cited by 10,735
The Economic Institutions of Capitalism
(1986) · The Antitrust Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0003603x8603100308 · Cited by 10,730
Powers, C. H., & Giddens, A. (1988) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2579442 · Cited by 8,854
Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities
Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.13.3.339.2780 · Cited by 6,963
Organizing and the process of sensemaking
Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0133 · Cited by 6,943
Toward a Model of Organizations as Interpretation Systems
Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1984.4277657 · Cited by 5,138
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- Ariño, Africa M., 2004, ‘The role of justice theory in explaining alliance negotiations’
- Barr, Pamela S., 1997, Journal of Management, 34, 337
- Gomes-Casseres, Benjamin, 1996, The alliance revolution
- Hill, Claire A., 2004, Chicago-Kent Law Review, 79, 889
- 10.1177/014920639502100603 · DOI · Paper page
- Kaplan, Sarah, 2003, MIT Sloan Management Review, 44, 71
- Lui, Steven S., 2004, Journal of Management, 30, 471
- Ness, Håvard, 12th Nordic Workshop on Interorganizational Research
- Obstfeld, David, 2004, ‘Saying more and less of what we know: The social processes of knowledge creation, innovation and agency’
- Porac, Joseph F., 2002, The Blackwell Companion to Organizations, 579
- Ring, Peter Smith, 1989, Research on the management of innovation: The Minnesota Studies, 171
- 10.5465/amr.1994.9410122009 · DOI · Paper page
- Sampson, Rachelle C., 2003, Case Western Law Review, 53, 909
- 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199808)19:8<793::AID-SMJ980>3.0.CO;2-Y · DOI
- Weick, Karl E., 1989, Schooling for tomorrow, 330
Cited by
Castañer, X., & Oliveira, N. (2020) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206320901565 · Cited by 525
Vlaar, P. W. L., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2007) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840607078003 · Cited by 136
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Vlaar, P. W. L., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W.
- Affiliations
- RSM Erasmus University, The Netherlands
- Venue
- Organization Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-11
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1617-1638
- ISSN
- 0170-8406
- 1741-3044
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 123
- Language
- en
- Licence
- journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
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.