Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,007

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Power and Trust: Critical Factors in the Adoption and Use of Electronic Data Interchange

Hart, Paul, Saunders, Carol·1997·Organization Science

Abstract

Computer networks are an increasingly important technology for improving the efficiency of information processing and providing shared access to information resources. Because computer networks are increasingly being used to support the flow of information between and within organizations, their use both influences and has consequences for interorganizational relationships. An important and widespread application of interorganizational computer networks is Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), which refers to the computer-based exchange of standardized business-related information between buyer and supplier firms. The following theoretical framework addresses the role that power and trust play in EDI adoption and use. Firms with greater power can influence their trading partners to adopt EDI. But power can be exercised in different ways. Because computer networks provide a way for certain information to be more accessible to outside parties, their use makes organizational boundaries more permeable. When firms use coercive power to force trading partners to adopt EDI, less powerful partners may be left more vulnerable. And, over time this perceived vulnerability becomes a constraint in interorganizational relationships that prevents improvements in coordination through expanded use of EDI. On the other hand, when the event of EDI adoption is viewed as an opportunity to build and reinforce trust between firms, the relationship is able to support organizational changes (e.g., restructuring operational processes or new modes of distribution) related to EDI use which contribute to improving interorganizational coordination. The role of power and trust in EDI adoption has important implications for interorganizational theory. Their role may be especially helpful in understanding how technology, and, in particular, electronic media support strategic alliances that firms create to advance mutual goals.

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.8.1.23

Cites

1 of 1 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 1,007

Metadata

Authors
Hart, P., & Saunders, C.
Venue
Organization Science
Published
1997-02
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
23-42
ISSN
  • 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5455
OpenAlex
W2097336498
Cited by
1,007
References
1
FWCI
105.49
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.