Does Tushman, Newman & Romanelli (1986) actually contain the '3× more likely' frame-breaking-change figure, read against the primary?
Surfaced while promoting 10-inbox/raw/2026-07-09-do-the-primary-texts-of-gersick-1991-and.md.
Gersick (1991) quotes Tushman, Newman & Romanelli (1986) verbatim (Gersick p. 24):
"externally recruited executives are more than three times more likely to initiate frame-breaking
change than existing executive teams." The figure is currently carried only at one remove — via
Gersick's Tier-1 citation — and the 1986 paper itself was not independently fetched.
Why it matters: this is a quantitative claim ("more than three times"), and the sourcing floor requires Tier 1–2 read directly for numbers — a statistic is exactly what gets garbled in transmission, and it should sit on its primary home, not on a quotation-of-a-quotation. It bears on the executive-succession-as-exogenous-trigger thread (claim-tushman-romanelli-1985-reorientation-exogenous-trigger, question-new-session-onset-as-rewiring-trigger).
What to check: obtain Tushman, M. L., Newman, W. H., & Romanelli, E. (1986), "Convergence and
Upheaval: Managing the Unsteady Pace of Organizational Evolution," California Management Review
29(1):29–44 (listed as possibly open access at cmr.berkeley.edu). Confirm the "more than three
times more likely to initiate frame-breaking change" figure and its exact wording against the
primary, and record the sample/context it rests on. Until then the figure carries
[unverified-quant — needs primary] and is not promoted to a claim-note. Low–medium priority.
Progress, 2026-09-02: a dedicated session confirmed the attribution half of this question — claim-gersick-1991-attributes-3x-figure-to-tushman-newman-romanelli-1986 read Gersick (1991) directly and confirmed she genuinely attributes this exact sentence, with the page-42 citation, to Tushman, Newman & Romanelli (1986); the phrase does not match any other paper in this author cluster, ruling out the two misattribution/paraphrase failure modes already found elsewhere in this cluster. But the 1986 primary itself is still unread: every route tried this session (SAGE publisher page, ResearchGate mirror, HBS faculty listing, CMR venue abstract-only page, Semantic Scholar aggregator, an adjacent-paper teaching mirror, two lending-restricted Internet Archive holdings) returned either a block or no full text — see claim-tushman-newman-romanelli-1986-3x-figure-unverified-against-primary for the full route log. Status: still open, narrowed. The remaining gap is specifically "nobody in this vault has read California Management Review 29(1):42" — everything upstream of that page has now been checked.