The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Influence of Founding Team Company Affiliations on Firm Behavior
Abstract
This paper's argument is that founding team composition—in particular, members' prior company affiliations—shapes new firm behaviors. Firms with founding teams whose members have worked at the same company engage in exploitation because they have shared understandings and can act quickly. Conversely, founding teams whose members have worked at many different companies have unique ideas and contacts that encourage exploration. In addition, firms whose founding teams have both common and diverse prior company affiliations have advantages that allow them to grow. The results suggest team composition is an important antecedent of exploitative and explorative behavior and firm ambidexterity.
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
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557
Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept
Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S.-W. (2002) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/4134367 · Cited by 9,665 · cited 2×
“External social capital refers to the actual and potential resources, outside information, and new ideas obtained through external ties (Adler & Kwon, 2002).”
BackgroundBurt, R. S. (1992) · doi:10.4159/9780674029095 · Cited by 9,093
Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, H. J. (1978) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1978.4305755 · Cited by 4,527
Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis
He, Z.-L., & Wong, P.-K. (2004) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1040.0078 · Cited by 3,737 · cited 3×
“For example, He and Wong (2004) find firms that have both exploitative and explorative innovation strategies have higher growth rates than other firms.”
BackgroundInfluentialWhat Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite
Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639702300303 · Cited by 3,526
Cited by
Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator's dilemma
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008) · Research in Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.riob.2008.06.002 · Cited by 2,431
Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance
Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1090.0428 · Cited by 2,224
Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation
Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0406 · Cited by 2,195
Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change
Kaplan, S., & Tripsas, M. (2008) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.02.002 · Cited by 661
Founding the Future: Path Dependence in the Evolution of Top Management Teams from Founding to IPO
Beckman, C. M., & Burton, M. D. (2008) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0311 · Cited by 605
Self-citationSimsek, Z., Fox, B. C., & Heavey, C. (2015) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206314553276 · Cited by 352
Shao, Z., Feng, Y., & Hu, Q. (2017) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2017.01.005 · Cited by 119
Metadata
- Authors
- Beckman, C. M.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Journal
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2006-08
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 741-758
- ISSN
- 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
- 1948-0989
- OpenAlex
- W2047227311
- Cited by
- 707
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 58.02
- 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.
