Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 799

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Virtualness and Knowledge in Teams: Managing the Love Triangle of Organizations, Individuals, and Information Technology1

Griffith, Terri L., Sawyer, John E., Neale, Margaret A.·2003·MIS Quarterly
DOI 10.2307/30036531
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Information technology can facilitate the dissemination of knowledge across the organization—even to the point of making virtual teams a viable alternative to face-to-face work. However, unless managed, the combination of information technology and virtual work may serve to change the distribution of different types of knowledge across individuals, teams, and the organization. Implications include the possibility that information technology plays the role of a jealous mistress when it comes to the development and ownership of valuable knowledge in organizations; that is, information technology may destabilize the relationship between organizations and their employees when it comes to the transfer of knowledge. The paper advances theory and informs practice by illustrating the dynamics of knowledge development and transfer in more and less virtual teams.

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 · 10.2307/30036531

Cites

15 of 15 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 799

Metadata

Authors
Griffith, T. L., Sawyer, J. E., & Neale, M. A.
Venue
MIS Quarterly
Publisher
MIS Quarterly
Published
2003-06-01
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
265-287
ISSN
  • 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-9730
DOI
10.2307/30036531
OpenAlex
W139070083
Cited by
799
References
15
FWCI
34.78
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.