Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 219

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

Vlaar, Paul W.L., Van den Bosch, Frans A.J., Volberda, Henk W.·2006·Organization Studies
DOI 10.1177/0170840606068338
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0170840606068338

Cites

123 of 123 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

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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Ariño, Africa M., 2004, ‘The role of justice theory in explaining alliance negotiations’
  2. Barr, Pamela S., 1997, Journal of Management, 34, 337
  3. Gomes-Casseres, Benjamin, 1996, The alliance revolution
  4. Hill, Claire A., 2004, Chicago-Kent Law Review, 79, 889
  5. 10.1177/014920639502100603 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Kaplan, Sarah, 2003, MIT Sloan Management Review, 44, 71
  7. Lui, Steven S., 2004, Journal of Management, 30, 471
  8. Ness, Håvard, 12th Nordic Workshop on Interorganizational Research
  9. Obstfeld, David, 2004, ‘Saying more and less of what we know: The social processes of knowledge creation, innovation and agency’
  10. Porac, Joseph F., 2002, The Blackwell Companion to Organizations, 579
  11. Ring, Peter Smith, 1989, Research on the management of innovation: The Minnesota Studies, 171
  12. 10.5465/amr.1994.9410122009 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Sampson, Rachelle C., 2003, Case Western Law Review, 53, 909
  14. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199808)19:8<793::AID-SMJ980>3.0.CO;2-Y · DOI
  15. Weick, Karl E., 1989, Schooling for tomorrow, 330

Cited by

See all 219

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
DOI
10.1177/0170840606068338
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.