The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Collective Centring and Collective Sense-making in the Stories and Storytelling of One Organization
Abstract
A vivid illustration of shared storytelling, collective centring, and collective sense-making appears in this study of one non-profit organization. Organiza tional members identify two stories that express the collective sense and allow centring on the shared meaning. Sense-making in a structurally closed organ ization is demonstrated. Organizational dynamics and root metaphors are examined and several approaches to the analysis of organizational myth and story are utilized. Dissonance between organizational members and the presid ent is apparent even though the organization is rooted in a unitary reality.
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
Cited by
Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward
Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2014) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2014.873177 · Cited by 1,764
Complex Thinking, Complex Practice: The Case for a Narrative Approach to Organizational Complexity
Tsoukas, H., & Hatch, M. J. (2001) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/0018726701548001 · Cited by 489
Metadata
- Authors
- Boyce, M. E.
- Venue
- Organization Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1995-01
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 107-137
- ISSN
- 0170-8406 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3044
- OpenAlex
- W2131111939
- Cited by
- 292
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.
