Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 14,181

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

External Control of Organizations: Resource Dependence Perspective

·2011·Organizational Behavior 6
DOI 10.4324/9781315701967-54
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Resource dependence theory was originally a product of Jeffrey Pfeffer, who later was joined by Gerald Salancik (Pfeffer and Salancik 1978). I have given this theory an estimated validity evaluation of five stars; the same importance rating is awarded by organizational behavior-5.29 to be exact (see Miner 2006a, Chapter 19; also Miner 2007, Chapter 25). In contradistinction to these high figures, resource dependence theory receives only a threestar evaluation on practical usefulness. It is essentially a sociological theory and, like most other theories of this genre, does not appear to have generated any meta-analyses. However, numerous positive evaluations exist.

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 · 10.4324/9781315701967-54

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

Venue
Organizational Behavior 6
Publisher
Routledge
Published
2011-06-01
Pages
267-271
DOI
10.4324/9781315701967-54
OpenAlex
W2068155429
Cited by
14,181
References
0
FWCI
2276.13
Type
book chapter
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.