Research on the Management of Innovation: The Minnesota Studies.
- Journal
- Administrative Science Quarterly
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.2307/2393364 →Countries where authors are citing Research on the Management of Innovation: The Minnesota Studies.
This map shows the geographic impact of Research on the Management of Innovation: The Minnesota Studies.. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Research on the Management of Innovation: The Minnesota Studies. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Research on the Management of Innovation: The Minnesota Studies. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Research on the Management of Innovation: The Minnesota Studies.
This network shows the impact of Research on the Management of Innovation: The Minnesota Studies.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Research on the Management of Innovation: The Minnesota Studies..
About Research on the Management of Innovation: The Minnesota Studies.
This paper, published in 1991, received 597 indexed citations . Written by Oscar Hauptman, Nitin Nohria, Andrew H. Van de Ven, Harold L. Angle and Marshall Scott Poole. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Strategy and Management (306 citations), Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management (157 citations) and Management of Technology and Innovation (123 citations). Published in Administrative Science Quarterly.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.
This paper is also available at doi.org/10.2307/2393364.