Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,389Social Power and Status DynamicsTeam Dynamics and PerformanceGender Diversity and Inequality

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 102 of the 102 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Power in Top Management Teams: Dimensions, Measurement, and Validation

Finkelstein, S.·1992·Academy of Management Journal

Abstract

Top managers' power plays a key role in strategic decision making. However, although numerous scholars have recognized its importance, very few have attempted to measure the phenomenon. In this article, I present a set of dimensions measuring top managers' power and suggest a measurement methodology to facilitate empirical inquiry. Data from a group of 1,763 top managers in three industries were used to assess the validity and reliability of the power dimensions in three studies. Results demonstrate strong support for the proposed power dimensions.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/256485

Cites

102 of 102 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 102 references

Cited by

Items 201–300 of 1,002

Metadata

Authors
Finkelstein, S.
Affiliations
University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
Finkelstein, S.
Venue
Academy of Management Journal
Published
1992-08-01
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
505-538
ISSN
  • 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
  • 1948-0989
OpenAlex
W2168930496
Cited by
2,389
References
102
Citations by year
2026: 112 · 2025: 147 · 2024: 153 · 2023: 170 · 2022: 144 · 2021: 144 · 2020: 142 · 2019: 124 · 2018: 117 · 2017: 100 · 2016: 104 · 2015: 109 · 2014: 97 · 2013: 84 · 2012: 87
FWCI
54.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Academy of Management Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Diversity and Inequality
Keywords
top management teams, managerial power, power measurement, strategic decision-making, measurement validity, reliability statistics, top managers
MeSH terms
Workforce, Administrative Personnel, Commerce, Data Collection, Decision Making, Organizational, Humans, Institutional Management Teams, Leadership, Power, Psychological, United States

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.