Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,471

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

Special Boundary Roles in the Innovation Process

Tushman, Michael L.·1977·Administrative Science Quarterly
DOI 10.2307/2392402
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A version of this paper was presented at the Academy of Management meetings, August 1976. The author thanks his colleagues David Lewin, Noel Tichy, and Michael Ginzberg, and an anonymous reviewer forASQ for their helpful comments and criticism. This work was supported by grants from the Center for Research in Career Development at Columbia University and from the Shell Companies Foundation.

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 · 10.2307/2392402

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 1,471

Metadata

Authors
Tushman, M. L.
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1977-12
Volume
22
Issue
4
Pages
587
ISSN
0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/2392402
OpenAlex
W2059353727
Cited by
1,471
References
1
FWCI
46.25
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: Special Boundary Roles in the Innovation Process. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2392402
The paper
Tushman, M. L. (1977). Special Boundary Roles in the Innovation Process. Administrative Science Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392402

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.