Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,576

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Institutional Linkages and Organizational Mortality

Baum, Joel A. C., Oliver, Christine·1991·Administrative Science Quarterly
DOI 10.2307/2393353
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This research was supported in part by a grant from the Office of Research Administration, University of Toronto. For helpful comments on this paper, we thank John Freeman and three anonymous ASO reviewers. For assistance with data collection and coding, we also thank Debbie Freeman, Brian Gaon, Gayle Greenbaum, and Sonja Saksida. This study examined the impact of institutional linkages on the failure of child care service organizations in Metropolitan Toronto, Canada, between 1971 and 1987. A dynamic analysis shows that organizations with institutional linkages exhibited a significant survival advantage that increased with the intensity of competition. The effectiveness of institutional linkages in contributing to survival also depended on the characteristics of organizations that established ties and theexternal legitimacy of the ties themselves. Institutional linkages also had a significant moderating influence on the relationship between organizational transformation and the risk of failure. The findings of this study suggest that efforts to establish the prepotency of institutional versus ecological explanations of organizational survival should not preclude inquiry into the causal consistencies and interactions between these theories' predictions.'

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 · 10.2307/2393353

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.

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Baum, J. A. C., & Oliver, C.
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1991-06
Volume
36
Issue
2
Pages
187
ISSN
0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/2393353
OpenAlex
W2043201255
Cited by
1,576
References
0
FWCI
13.01
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.