The DOI matches its Crossref record; 107 of the 107 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Discretion Within Constraint: Homophily and Structure in a Formal Organization
Open accessAbstract
Homophily in social relations results from both individual preferences and selective opportunities for interaction, but how these two mechanisms interact in large, contemporary organizations is not well understood. We argue that organizational structures and geography delimit opportunities for interaction such that actors have a greater level of discretion to choose their interaction partners within business units, job functions, offices, and quasi-formal structures. This leads us to expect to find a higher proportion of homophilous interactions within these organizational structures than across their boundaries. We test our theory in an analysis of the rate of dyadic communication in an email data set comprising thousands of employees in a large information technology firm. These findings have implications for research on homophily, gender relations in organizations, and formal and informal organizational structure.
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
Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415 · Cited by 18,567
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S. S., & Faust, K. (1994) · Cited by 17,961
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557
Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.383 · Cited by 12,939 · cited 1×
“Indeed, knowledge work often depends on the sharing of information and know-how that is distributed across an organization (Kogut and Zander 1992).”
Williamson, O. E. (1975) · Free Press eBooks · Cited by 9,210
Men and Women of the Corporation.
Strauss, G., & Kanter, R. M. (1978) · Industrial and Labor Relations Review · doi:10.2307/2522922 · Cited by 7,288
Silva, J. M. C. S., & Tenreyro, S. (2006) · The Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest.88.4.641 · Cited by 6,408
Men and Women of the Corporation
Devanna, M. A. (1978) · The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · doi:10.1177/002188637801400208 · Cited by 6,354
Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action
Lin, N. (2001) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815447 · Cited by 4,535
Kilzer, E., & Wolff, K. H. (1950) · The American Catholic Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/3707052 · Cited by 4,521
Cited by
Activist Choice Homophily and the Crowdfunding of Female Founders
Greenberg, J., & Mollick, E. (2017) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0001839216678847 · Cited by 528
Similar neural responses predict friendship
Parkinson, C., Kleinbaum, A. M., & Wheatley, T. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-017-02722-7 · Cited by 388
Self-citationMcEvily, B., Soda, G., & Tortoriello, M. (2014) · The Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.1080/19416520.2014.885252 · Cited by 341
The dark sides of people analytics: Reviewing the perils for organisations and employees
Giermindl, L. M., Strich, F., Christ, O., Leicht-Deobald, U., & Redzepi, A. (2022) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1080/0960085x.2021.1927213 · Cited by 331
Collaborating During Coronavirus: The Impact of COVID-19 on the Nature of Work
DeFilippis, E., Impink, S. M., Singell, M., Polzer, J., & Sadun, R. (2020) · doi:10.3386/w27612 · Cited by 273
Metadata
- Authors
- Kleinbaum, A. M., Stuart, T. E., & Tushman, M. L.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2013-10
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1316-1336
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2066703697
- Cited by
- 377
- References
- 107
- FWCI
- 75.22
- 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: Discretion Within Constraint: Homophily and Structure in a Formal Organization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.1120.0804
- The paper
- Kleinbaum, A. M., Stuart, T. E., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Discretion Within Constraint: Homophily and Structure in a Formal Organization. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0804
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.
