The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Intrafirm Competition and Charter Evolution in the Multibusiness Firm
Open accessAbstract
We develop a theoretical framework for a specific form of intrafirm competition, namely the extent of overlap between the charters of two or more units in a single organization. This phenomenon is commonly seen in large organizations, e.g., cases of two business units producing competing products, or two product development groups trying to solve the same technological problem, but the existing academic literature provides little insight into the forms intrafirm competition takes, or the conditions under which it is beneficial or harmful to the organization. Building on the concept of an organization charter (Galunic and Eisenhardt 2001), we identify two generic forms of intrafirm competition: the dynamic community model has fluid and frequently changing charter boundaries, and it emerges through the creation of strategic options in the face of a changing environment; the coexistence model has fixed and relatively static charter boundaries, and it owes its existence to economies of scope and differentiation of unit charters to cover multiple market segments. In the body of the paper we develop a theoretical framework to specify the environmental and organizational conditions under which each form of intrafirm competition is expected to occur.
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
Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554 · Cited by 9,868
Strategic assets and organizational rent
Amit, R., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1993) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250140105 · Cited by 8,425
Technological paradigms and technological trajectories
Dosi, G. (1982) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(82)90016-6 · Cited by 6,685
Determinants of Coordination Modes within Organizations
Ven, A. H. V. D., Delbecq, A. L., & Koenig, R. (1976) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2094477 · Cited by 1,979
Birkinshaw, J., & Hood, N. (1998) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1998.1255638 · Cited by 1,254
Self-citationExplaining the Swollen Middle: Why Most Transactions Are a Mix of “Market” and “Hierarchy”
Hennart, J.-F. (1993) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.4.4.529 · Cited by 652
Cited by
Rugman, A., Verbeke, A., & Yuan, W. (2011) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00969.x · Cited by 299
Gardner, H. K., Anand, N., & Morris, T. (2008) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.557 · Cited by 72
Naidoo, S., & Sutherland, M. (2016) · South African Journal of Business Management · doi:10.4102/sajbm.v47i1.54 · Cited by 27
Is sibling rivalry good or bad for high technology organizations?
Khoja, F. (2008) · The Journal of High Technology Management Research · doi:10.1016/j.hitech.2008.06.006 · Cited by 10
Content and process: Organizational conflict and decision making
Gaba, V., & Joseph, J. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1227966 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Birkinshaw, J., & Lingblad, M.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2005-12
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 674-686
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W1486225255
- Cited by
- 193
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 12.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Intrafirm Competition and Charter Evolution in the Multibusiness Firm. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.1050.0142
- The paper
- Birkinshaw, J., & Lingblad, M. (2005). Intrafirm Competition and Charter Evolution in the Multibusiness Firm. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0142
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.