The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Giving Sense to and Making Sense of Justice in Postmerger Integration
Abstract
The objective of this article is to elucidate how justice in general and distributive justice in particular are given sense to and made sense of in postmerger integration. Drawing on a longitudinal real-time analysis of a recent merger, we identify a pattern in which focus moved from equality to equity to less emphasis on distributive justice. To understand the dynamics involved, we develop a process model that explains how actors reconcile pressures of value creation and sociopolitical concerns in dialogical “sensegiving” and “sensemaking” processes that lead to the enactment of specific norms of justice. This analysis adds to research on mergers and acquisitions by facilitating understanding of the crucial role that norms of justice play in postmerger integration, of the way in which they change over time as integration processes unfold, and of the intergroup dynamics through which these norms of justice are enacted. By uncovering the microdynamics of dialogical sensegiving and sensemaking processes, we also contribute to research on organizational justice, sensemaking, and process studies.
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
Adams, J. S. (1965) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60108-2 · Cited by 10,818
Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data
Langley, A. (1999) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2553248 · Cited by 7,008
Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.425 · Cited by 5,942
Explaining Development and Change in Organizations
van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1995.9508080329 · Cited by 3,762
Piderit, S. K. (2000) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2000.3707722 · Cited by 1,873
Cited by
Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward
Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2014) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2014.873177 · Cited by 1,764
Brattström, A., & Faems, D. (2020) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2018.0038 · Cited by 63
van den Broek, E., Sergeeva, A., & Huysman, M. (2026) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.13276 · Cited by 17
The Multinational Corporation as a Playing Field of Power: A Bourdieusian Approach
Delmestri, G., & Brumana, M. (2017) · Multinational Corporations and Organization Theory: Post Millennium Perspectives · doi:10.1108/s0733-558x20160000049011 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Monin, P., Noorderhaven, N., Vaara, E., & Kroon, D.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Journal
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2013-02
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 256-284
- ISSN
- 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
- 1948-0989
- OpenAlex
- W2129617444
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 29.53
- 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.