Cited by 697Business Strategy and InnovationManagement and Organizational StudiesInnovation and Knowledge Management

Legitimacy Building in the Evolution of Small-Firm Multilateral Networks: A Comparative Study of Success and Demise

Human, Sherrie E., Provan, Keith G.·2000·Administrative Science Quarterly

Abstract

This article reports a longitudinal examination and comparison of two multilateral networks of small and medium-sized firms in the U.S. wood-products manufacturing industry. The research focused on how each of these networks built legitimacy over the course of their early evolution, from the pre-network field, to initial formation and growth, and toward sustainment, culminating in the success of one and the demise of the other. Our findings demonstrate that despite differences in their early bases of support, which resulted in very different strategic emphases, the two networks ultimately had to address three conceptually distinct dimensions of legitimacy—the network as form, the network as entity, and the network as interaction. Based on the findings, we develop specific propositions and draw some tentative conclusions about how legitimacy is established in multilateral networks and how the failure to build legitimacy across the three dimensions may lead to network collapse.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2667074

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Other research has identified significantly different relationship strategies in the same industry, although the use of similar technologies is also reported.

    “Other research has identified significantly different relationship strategies in the same industry (Human and Provan, 2000), although the use of similar technologies is also reported (North, Leigh et al., 1992).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Human, S. E., & Provan, K. G.
Affiliations
  • Xavier University (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
2000-06
Volume
45
Issue
2
Pages
327-365
ISSN
  • 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-3815
OpenAlex
W2007803925
Cited by
697
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 45 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 50 · 2012: 33
FWCI
22.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Administrative Science Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Business Strategy and Innovation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
Keywords
legitimacy building, small and medium-sized enterprises, network formation, network collapse, wood products industry, organizational networks

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