Cited by 110Innovation and Knowledge ManagementResearch, Science, and AcademiaManagement and Organizational Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Coordinated Exploration for Grand Challenges: The Role of Advocacy Groups in Search Consortia

Open access
Olsen, Anders Ørding, Sofka, Wolfgang, Grimpe, Christoph·2016·Academy of Management Journal

Abstract

Grand challenges are among the most complex problems for modern societies. Many governments and foundations provide substantial resources to encourage the search for solutions. Due to the significance of these problems, organizations often form partnerships in what we call search consortia to engage in joint search and compete for funding. Prior research on joint search highlights the role of specialized organizations, mainly regarding technological domains, to identify a superior solution. However, stakeholder theory leads us to believe that the success of any solution depends on the acceptance and support of important stakeholders. In this study, we suggest that search consortia are more likely to receive funding when they include representatives of stakeholder concerns, so-called advocacy groups. We extend theory on coordinated exploration in joint search by integrating mechanisms from stakeholder theory and argue that advocacy groups improve the generation of potential solutions and provide legitimacy. We test our theory with a unique dataset of 35,249 consortia that proposed solutions to 2,349 grand challenge problems as part of a large European funding program. Our results show that advocacy groups benefit search consortia, particularly when consortia exhibit a high dispersion of technological knowledge and when they are inexperienced.

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 · 10.5465/amj.2015.0730

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

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?

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

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 67

  1. Aldrich H. E., 1994, Academy of Management Review, 19, 645, 10.5465/amr.1994.9412190214 · DOI
  2. Anderson P., 1999, Organization Science, 10, 216, 10.1287/orsc.10.3.216 · DOI
  3. Azoulay P., 2010, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125, 549, 10.1162/qjec.2010.125.2.549 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Bascle G., 2008, Strategic Organization, 6, 285, 10.1177/1476127008094339 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Baum J. A. C., 1991, Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 187, 10.2307/2393353 · DOI
  6. Belsley D. A., Kuh E., Welsh R. E. 1980.Regression diagnostics: Identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York: Wiley. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Bitektine A., 2011, Academy of Management Review, 36, 151, 10.5465/amr.2009.0382 · DOI
  8. Boeker W., 1989, Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 388, 10.2307/2393150 · DOI
  9. Bosse D. A., Journal of Management Studies
  10. Boudreau K. J., 2016, Management Science
  11. Brown S. L., 1995, Academy of Management Review, 20, 343, 10.5465/amr.1995.9507312922 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Certo S. T., 2003, Academy of Management Review, 28, 432, 10.5465/amr.2003.10196754 · DOI
  13. Certo S. T., Strategic Management Journal
  14. Choi Y. R., 2005, Journal of Management, 31, 573, 10.1177/0149206304272294 · DOI
  15. Christmann P., 2004, Academy of Management Journal, 47, 747, 10.2307/20159616 · DOI
  16. Clarkson M. B. E., 1995, Academy of Management Review, 20, 92, 10.5465/amr.1995.9503271994 · DOI
  17. Cohen W. M., 1990, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128, 10.2307/2393553 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Colquitt J. A., 2011, Academy of Management Journal, 54, 432, 10.5465/AMJ.2011.61965960 · DOI
  19. Criscuolo P., 2016, Academy of Management Journal
  20. Davis J. P., 2011, Administrative Science Quarterly, 56, 159, 10.1177/0001839211428131 · DOI
  21. Deephouse D. L., 1999, Strategic Management Journal, 20, 147, 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199902)20:2<147::AID-SMJ11>3.0.CO;2-Q · DOI · Paper page
  22. Dodgson M., 2015, Academy of Management Journal, 58, 325, 10.5465/amj.2015.4002 · DOI
  23. Drees J. M., 2013, Journal of Management, 39, 1666, 10.1177/0149206312471391 · DOI
  24. Duriau V. J., 2007, Organizational Research Methods, 10, 5, 10.1177/1094428106289252 · DOI
  25. Eesley C., 2006, Strategic Management Journal, 27, 765, 10.1002/smj.536 · DOI
  26. European Commission, 2007, FP7 in brief: How to get involved in the EU 7th Framework Programme for Research
  27. Flammer C., 2016, Management Science, 62, 1982, 10.1287/mnsc.2015.2229 · DOI
  28. Freeman R. E., 1984, Strategic management: A stakeholder approach
  29. Frooman J., 1999, Academy of Management Review, 24, 191, 10.5465/amr.1999.1893928 · DOI
  30. Gavetti G., 2000, Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 113, 10.2307/2666981 · DOI
  31. George G., 2014, Academy of Management Journal, 57, 321, 10.5465/amj.2014.4002 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Godfray H. C., 2011, Science, 331, 1013, 10.1126/science.1202899 · DOI
  33. Hamilton B. H., 2003, Strategic Organization, 1, 51, 10.1177/1476127003001001218 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Hannan M. T., 1989, Organizational ecology, 10.4159/9780674038288 · DOI
  35. Harrison J. S., 1996, The Academy of Management Executive, 10, 46
  36. Harrison J. S., 2010, Strategic Management Journal, 31, 58, 10.1002/smj.801 · DOI
  37. Harting T. R., 2006, Business Ethics Quarterly, 16, 43, 10.5840/beq20061612 · DOI
  38. Heugens P. P. M. A. R., 2002, Business & Society, 41, 36
  39. Howard-Grenville J., 2014, Academy of Management Journal, 57, 615, 10.5465/amj.2014.4003 · DOI
  40. Hummels D., 2014, The American Economic Review, 104, 1597, 10.1257/aer.104.6.1597 · DOI
  41. Iacus S. M., 2011, Political Analysis, 20, 1, 10.1093/pan/mpr013 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Iansiti M., 1995, Research Policy, 24, 521, 10.1016/S0048-7333(94)00781-0 · DOI
  43. Jaffe A. B., 1986, The American Economic Review, 76, 984
  44. Jones T. M., 1995, Academy of Management Review, 20, 404, 10.5465/amr.1995.9507312924 · DOI
  45. Knudsen T., 2007, Organization Science, 18, 39, 10.1287/orsc.1060.0216 · DOI
  46. Knudsen T., 2014, Administrative Science Quarterly, 59, 409, 10.1177/0001839214538021 · DOI
  47. Kotha R., 2013, Academy of Management Journal, 56, 498, 10.5465/amj.2010.0948 · DOI
  48. Krippendorff K., 2004, Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology
  49. Liu J., 2015, Science, 347, 1258832, 10.1126/science.1258832 · DOI
  50. Lounamaa P. H., 1987, Management Science, 33, 107, 10.1287/mnsc.33.1.107 · DOI
  51. Love J. H., 2014, Strategic Management Journal, 35, 1703, 10.1002/smj.2170 · DOI
  52. Madhavan R., 1998, Journal of Marketing, 62, 1, 10.2307/1252283 · DOI
  53. Mitchell R. K., 1997, Academy of Management Journal, 22, 853
  54. Nadkarni S., 2008, Strategic Management Journal, 29, 1395, 10.1002/smj.717 · DOI
  55. Olsen A. Ø., 2016, Long Range Planning
  56. Omenn G. S., 2006, Science, 314, 1696, 10.1126/science.1135003 · DOI
  57. Piezunka H., 2015, Academy of Management Journal, 58, 856, 10.5465/amj.2012.0458 · DOI
  58. Puranam P., 2012, Academy of Management Review, 37, 419, 10.5465/amr.2010.0535 · DOI
  59. Puranam P., 2016, Organization Science, 27, 323, 10.1287/orsc.2015.1033 · DOI
  60. Ring P. S., 1994, Academy of Management Review, 19, 90, 10.5465/amr.1994.9410122009 · DOI
  61. Savage G. T., 1991, The Academy of Management Executive, 5, 61, 10.5465/AME.1991.4274682 · DOI
  62. Siggelkow N., 2005, Organization Science, 16, 101, 10.1287/orsc.1050.0116 · DOI
  63. Simon H. A., 1962, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106, 467
  64. Suchman M. C., 1995, Academy of Management Review, 20, 571, 10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331 · DOI · Paper page
  65. Terry S. F., 2007, Nature Reviews. Genetics, 8, 157, 10.1038/nrg1991 · DOI
  66. Varmus H., 2003, Science, 302, 398, 10.1126/science.1091769 · DOI
  67. Vergne J.-P., 2012, Academy of Management Journal, 55, 1027, 10.5465/amj.2010.0599 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Olsen, A. Ø., Sofka, W., & Grimpe, C.
Affiliations
Copenhagen Business School (DK)
Venue
Academy of Management Journal
Published
2016-12
Volume
59
Issue
6
Pages
2232-2255
ISSN
  • 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
  • 1948-0989
OpenAlex
W2520592489
Cited by
110
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1
FWCI
12.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Academy of Management Journal (publishedVersion)
  • CBS Research Portal (Copenhagen Business School) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Strategiske Forskningsråd
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Research, Science, and Academia
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
Keywords
societal challenges, advocacy organizations, stakeholder theory, research funding, legitimacy

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