The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Common interest, common good: creating value through business and social sector partnerships
Abstract
Business firms and non-profit organizations are increasingly collaborating. Such collaborations promise substantial mutual benefits as business firms realize the extent to which their profits depend on a healthy environment and social entrepreneurs begin to appreciate how applying business principles can enable them to fulfill their missions more effectively. Nevertheless, for the benefits of crosssector partnerships to be achieved, each partner must have a realistic understanding of both the challenges and potential pitfalls of their relationship.
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
Cited by
Misery Loves Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business
Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3556659 · Cited by 5,130
Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight
Mair, J., & Martí, I. (2006) · Journal of World Business · doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2005.09.002 · Cited by 4,015
Collaboration Processes: Inside the Black Box
Thomson, A. M., & Perry, J. L. (2006) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00663.x · Cited by 1,386
Austin, J. E., & Seitanidi, M. M. (2012) · Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0899764012450777 · Cited by 678
Conceptualizing and Measuring Collaboration
Thomson, A. M., Perry, J. L., & Miller, T. K. (2007) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/mum036 · Cited by 615
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 2000-04-01
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 08
- Pages
- 37-4590-37-4590
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W2020602139
- Cited by
- 224
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- 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: Common interest, common good: creating value through business and social sector partnerships. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.37-4590
- The paper
- Common interest, common good: creating value through business and social sector partnerships. (2000). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.37-4590
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.
