The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Relational Contracts and Organizational Capabilities
Open accessAbstract
A large literature identifies unique organizational capabilities as a potent source of competitive advantage, yet our knowledge of why capabilities fail to diffuse more rapidly—particularly in situations in which competitors apparently have strong incentives to adopt them and a well-developed understanding of how they work—remains incomplete. In this paper we suggest that competitively significant capabilities often rest on managerial practices that in turn rely on relational contracts (i.e., informal agreements sustained by the shadow of the future). We argue that one of the reasons these practices may be difficult to copy is that effective relational contracts must solve the twin problems of credibility and clarity and that although credibility might, in principle, be instantly acquired, clarity may take time to develop and may interact with credibility in complex ways so that relational contracts may often be difficult to build.
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
Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393553 · Cited by 35,728
A resource‐based view of the firm
Wernerfelt, B. (1984) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250050207 · Cited by 25,635
Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action
Ostrom, E. (1990) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511807763 · Cited by 20,653
Spence, M. (1973) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/1882010 · Cited by 16,171
Not So Different After All: A Cross-Discipline View Of Trust
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1998.926617 · Cited by 10,274
Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393549 · Cited by 8,357
Self-citationThe Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage
Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259056 · Cited by 4,773
Strategic information transmission
Crawford, V. P., & Sobel, J. (1982) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913390 · Cited by 4,293
Managing with Style: The Effect of Managers on Firm Policies
Bertrand, M., & Schoar, A. (2003) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355303322552775 · Cited by 3,894
Organizational Culture: Can It Be a Source of Sustained Competitive Advantage?
Barney, J. B. (1986) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258317 · Cited by 3,860
Cited by
Teece, D., Peteraf, M., & Leih, S. (2016) · California Management Review · doi:10.1525/cmr.2016.58.4.13 · Cited by 2,317
How Applying Instrumental Stakeholder Theory Can Provide Sustainable Competitive Advantage
Jones, T. M., Harrison, J. S., & Felps, W. (2018) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2016.0111 · Cited by 674
Blockchain Governance—A New Way of Organizing Collaborations?
Lumineau, F., Wang, W., & Schilke, O. (2021) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2020.1379 · Cited by 532
The mirroring hypothesis: theory, evidence, and exceptions
Colfer, L. J., & Baldwin, C. Y. (2016) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/dtw027 · Cited by 331
Renewing the resource‐based view: New contexts, new concepts, and new methods
Helfat, C. E., Kaul, A., Ketchen, D. J., Barney, J. B., Chatain, O., & Singh, H. (2023) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3500 · Cited by 319
Metadata
- Authors
- Gibbons, R., & Henderson, R.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2012-10
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1350-1364
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2028611915
- Cited by
- 537
- References
- 62
- FWCI
- 61.51
- 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: Relational Contracts and Organizational Capabilities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.1110.0715
- The paper
- Gibbons, R., & Henderson, R. (2012). Relational Contracts and Organizational Capabilities. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0715
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.
