The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Living With Multiple Paradigms the Case of Paradigm Interplay in Organizational Culture Studies
Abstract
This article presents a new strategy for multiparadigm research that promotes interplay between paradigms. We develop interplay across the border of functionalist and interpretive paradigms and use organizational culture studies as an example of how interplay affects multi-paradigm relations. In addition to clarifying paradigm contrasts, the article points to connections between paradigms by taking a postmodern perspective.
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
Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building
Gioia, D. A., & Pitre, E. (1990) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1990.4310758 · Cited by 1,426
Paradoxical Thinking and Change in the Frames of Reference
Westenholz, A. (1993) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/017084069301400104 · Cited by 175
Cited by
Contradictions, Dialectics, and Paradoxes in Organizations: A Constitutive Approach
Putnam, L. L., Fairhurst, G. T., & Banghart, S. (2016) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2016.1162421 · Cited by 1,116
Taking an eventful historic turn down the cultural memory lane
Deal, N. M., Novicevic, M. M., Mills, A. J., Lugar, C. W., & Roberts, F. (2021) · Journal of Management History · doi:10.1108/jmh-05-2020-0034 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Schultz, M., & Hatch, M. J.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Review
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 1996-04
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 529-557
- ISSN
- 0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3807
- OpenAlex
- W2076923282
- Cited by
- 415
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 11.75
- 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.
