Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 411

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?

Gilbert, Clark G.·2006·Organization Science
DOI 10.1287/orsc.1050.0160
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/orsc.1050.0160

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 411

Metadata

Authors
Gilbert, C. G.
Venue
Organization Science
Publisher
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
Published
2006-02
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
150-167
ISSN
  • 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5455
DOI
10.1287/orsc.1050.0160
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

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.