The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Change in the Presence of Residual Fit: Can Competing Frames Coexist?
Abstract
Opportunities associated with discontinuous change typically do not trigger organizational response until the opportunity is perceived as a threat. However, threat perception can then trigger a response that accentuates organizational rigidity. This cognitive paradox is explored using a multilevel, longitudinal case study of a newspaper organization’s response to digital publishing. The results suggest that the competing frames of threat and opportunity can coexist within the firm when it creates organizationally differentiated subunits. Such a structure minimizes the need to integrate competing frames at the subunit level, enabling different behaviors to be enacted simultaneously across different units of the firm. This differentiated organizational form places an increased burden on senior teams that have to manage the inconsistencies across subunits. Insight into the structure of competing frames has broader implications for the structure of dynamic capabilities.
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
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Hartley, J. (2004) · Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research · doi:10.4135/9781446280119.n26 · Cited by 15,461
Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action.
Jick, T. D. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392366 · Cited by 7,103
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.4.341 · Cited by 6,544
Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250131009 · Cited by 6,477
The dynamic resource‐based view: capability lifecycles
Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2003) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.332 · Cited by 4,553
Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric.
Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271 · Cited by 2,520
Putting Time in Perspective: A Valid, Reliable Individual-Differences Metric
Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (2015) · Time Perspective Theory; Review, Research and Application · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07368-2_2 · Cited by 2,147
Rosch, E. (1975) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(75)90021-3 · Cited by 1,423
Alba, J. W., & Hasher, L. (1983) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.93.2.203 · Cited by 1,169
Cited by
Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance
Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1090.0428 · Cited by 2,224
Dynamic Capabilities: A Review of Past Research and an Agenda for the Future
Barreto, I. (2010) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206309350776 · Cited by 1,948
Toward a Theory of Paradox: A Dynamic equilibrium Model of Organizing
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2009.0223 · Cited by 1,631
Lu, Y., & Ramamurthy, K. (. (2011) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41409967 · Cited by 1,309
Disruptive Innovation: An Intellectual History and Directions for Future Research
Christensen, C. M., McDonald, R., Altman, E. J., & Palmer, J. E. (2018) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12349 · Cited by 789
Metadata
- Authors
- Gilbert, C. G.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2006-02
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 150-167
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2135496778
- Cited by
- 411
- References
- 13
- FWCI
- 36.82
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Change in the Presence of Residual Fit: Can Competing Frames Coexist? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.1050.0160
- The paper
- Gilbert, C. G. (2006). Change in the Presence of Residual Fit: Can Competing Frames Coexist? Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0160
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.
