The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Knowledge Sharing in Organizations: Multiple Networks, Multiple Phases
Abstract
Different subsets of social networks may explain knowledge sharing outcomes in different ways. One subset may counteract another subset, and one subset may explain one outcome but not another. We found support for these arguments in an analysis of a sample of 121 new-product development teams. Within-team and interunit networks had different effects on the outcomes of three knowledge-sharing phases: deciding whether to seek knowledge across subunits, search costs, and costs of transfers. These results suggest that research on knowledge sharing can be advanced by studying how multiple networks affect various phases of knowledge sharing.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557
Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920638601200408 · Cited by 17,102
The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004) · Political Psychology · doi:10.4324/9780203505984-16 · Cited by 13,467
Burt, R. S. (1992) · doi:10.4159/9780674029095 · Cited by 9,093
Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm
Szulanski, G. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171105 · Cited by 7,839
The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits
Hansen, M. T. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667032 · Cited by 5,809 · cited 5×
“Furthermore, while some research has analyzed properties of a subunit's total set of interunit relations (e.g., Hansen, 1999; Tsai, 2001), other studies have focused exclusively on the properties of dyadic relations involving one providing and one receiving unit in a transfer event (e.g., Gupta &…”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationKatz, R., & Allen, T. J. (1982) · R&D Management · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1982.tb00478.x · Cited by 1,410
Cited by
Knowledge sharing, innovation and firm performance
Wang, Z., & Wang, N. (2012) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.02.017 · Cited by 1,123
Expatriate Knowledge Transfer, Subsidiary Absorptive Capacity, and Subsidiary Performance
Chang, Y.-Y., Gong, Y., & Peng, M. W. (2012) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0985 · Cited by 528
Geographic Distribution of R&D Activity: How Does it Affect Innovation Quality?
Lahiri, N. (2010) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2010.54533233 · Cited by 438
Knowledge-sharing and social interaction within MNEs
Noorderhaven, N., & Harzing, A.-W. (2009) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2008.106 · Cited by 423
Chuang, C.-H., Jackson, S. E., & Jiang, Y. (2016) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206313478189 · Cited by 423
Metadata
- Authors
- Hansen, M. T., Mors, M. L., & Løvås, B.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Journal
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 776-793
- ISSN
- 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
- 1948-0989
- OpenAlex
- W2072903557
- Cited by
- 786
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 93.88
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Knowledge Sharing in Organizations: Multiple Networks, Multiple Phases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5465/amj.2005.18803922
- The paper
- Hansen, M. T., Mors, M. L., & Løvås, B. (2005). Knowledge Sharing in Organizations: Multiple Networks, Multiple Phases. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.18803922
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.
