The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Impact of Stakeholder Orientation on Innovation: Evidence from a Natural Experiment
Abstract
In this study, we assess the causal impact of stakeholder orientation on innovation. To obtain exogenous variation in stakeholder orientation, we exploit the enactment of state-level constituency statutes, which allow directors to consider stakeholders’ interests when making business decisions. Using a difference-in-differences methodology, we find that the enactment of constituency statutes leads to a significant increase in the number of patents and citations per patent. We further argue and provide evidence suggesting that stakeholder orientation sparks innovation by encouraging experimentation and enhancing employees’ innovative productivity. Finally, we find that the positive effect of stakeholder orientation on innovation is larger in consumer-focused and less eco-friendly industries. Data, as supplemental material, are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2229 . This paper was accepted by Lee Fleming, entrepreneurship and 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
Maslow, A. H. (1943) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0054346 · Cited by 21,563
Endogenous Technological Change
Romer, P. M. (1990) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/261725 · Cited by 17,711
How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?
Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355304772839588 · Cited by 10,641
HUSELID, M. A. (1995) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256741 · Cited by 9,342
Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Research
Fournier, S. (1998) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209515 · Cited by 7,542
“A Model of Growth: Through Creative Destruction”
Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/2951599 · Cited by 7,529
Corporate Governance and Equity Prices
Gompers, P., Ishii, J., & Metrick, A. (2003) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/00335530360535162 · Cited by 6,120
ASSESSING THE WORK ENVIRONMENT FOR CREATIVITY.
AMABILE, T. M., CONTI, R., COON, H., LAZENBY, J., & HERRON, M. (1996) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256995 · Cited by 6,029
Does Doing Good Always Lead to Doing Better? Consumer Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility
Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838 · Cited by 4,659
WHY COMPANIES GO GREEN: A MODEL OF ECOLOGICAL RESPONSIVENESS.
Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/1556363 · Cited by 4,020
Cited by
Hawn, O., Chatterji, A., & Mitchell, W. (2014) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2418300 · Cited by 339
Bae, K.-H., El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C. Y., & Zheng, Y. (2019) · Journal of Banking & Finance · doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2018.11.007 · Cited by 207
Coordinated Exploration for Grand Challenges: The Role of Advocacy Groups in Search Consortia
Olsen, A. Ø., Sofka, W., & Grimpe, C. (2016) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2015.0730 · Cited by 110
Socially Responsible Firms Outsource Less
Murcia, M. J., Panwar, R., & Tarzijan, J. (2021) · Business & Society · doi:10.1177/0007650319898490 · Cited by 56
Metadata
- Authors
- Flammer, C., & Kacperczyk, A.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2016-07
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1982-2001
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2617583700
- Cited by
- 443
- References
- 15
- FWCI
- 89.89
- 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.
