The DOI matches its Crossref record; 124 of the 124 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Complexity Arrangements for Sustained Innovation: Lessons from 3M Corporation
Open accessAbstract
Innovation processes are complex. It is through local interactions among people and technologies that diverse and novel outcomes emerge. Even when governed by simple rules, such interactions can generate nonlinear temporal dynamics. Given such complexities, how might an organization sustain innovation for continued growth and vitality? Drawing on an in-depth study of innovation practices and journeys at 3M Corporation, we identify how combinations of practices — which we conceptualize as complexity arrangements — afford multiple agentic orientations simultaneously for the actors involved and thereby facilitate sustained innovation.
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.
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
(1994) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/0002-8223(94)92216-0 · Cited by 45,910
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942 · cited 2×
“For instance, deviations that are an important part of innovation can easily disrupt firm operations (March 1991).”
(1984) · Cited by 21,166
The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195092691.001.0001 · Cited by 18,010
Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory
Latour, B. (2005) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199256044.001.0001 · Cited by 16,778
The Knowledge-Creating Company
Nonaka, I. (1998) · The Economic Impact of Knowledge · doi:10.1016/b978-0-7506-7009-8.50016-1 · Cited by 14,619
Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams
Edmondson, A. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2666999 · Cited by 12,026
Research in Organizational Behavior.
Grimes, A. J., Cummings, L. L., & Staw, B. M. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392975 · Cited by 10,899
Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989) · Social Studies of Science · doi:10.1177/030631289019003001 · Cited by 10,847
(1969) · Virtual Defense Library (Ministerio de Defensa) · Cited by 10,735
Cited by
Process Studies of Change in Organization and Management: Unveiling Temporality, Activity, and Flow
Langley, A., Smallman, C., Tsoukas, H., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2013) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2013.4001 · Cited by 2,301
Tsoukas, H. (2017) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12219 · Cited by 368
When Times Collide: Temporal Brokerage at the Intersection of Markets and Developments
Reinecke, J., & Ansari, S. (2015) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2012.1004 · Cited by 334
The Interplay between Intuition and Rationality in Strategic Decision Making: A Paradox Perspective
Calabretta, G., Gemser, G., & Wijnberg, N. M. (2017) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840616655483 · Cited by 324
“These demands include, for example, exploring versus exploiting (Garud et al., 2011; Smith, 2014; Smith & Tushman, 2005), creativity and flexibility versus efficiency and productivity (Lüscher & Lewis, 2008), and technological stability versus evolvability (Wareham et al., 2014) – all of which…”
The competition–cooperation paradox in inter-firm relationships: A conceptual framework
Gnyawali, D. R., Madhavan, R., He, J., & Bengtsson, M. (2016) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.11.014 · Cited by 304
Metadata
- Authors
- Garud, R., Gehman, J., & Kumaraswamy, A.
- Venue
- Organization Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-06
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 737-767
- ISSN
- 0170-8406 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3044
- OpenAlex
- W2113428597
- Cited by
- 313
- References
- 124
- FWCI
- 60.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Complexity Arrangements for Sustained Innovation: Lessons from 3M Corporation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0170840611410810
- The paper
- Garud, R., Gehman, J., & Kumaraswamy, A. (2011). Complexity Arrangements for Sustained Innovation: Lessons from 3M Corporation. Organization Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840611410810
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.
