MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W349249908

Globalization of R&D Enters New Stage as Firms Learn to Integrate Technology Operations on World Scale

2000· article· en· W349249908 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Manuel G. Serapio, Donald H. Dalton, Phyllis Genther Yoshida

Notice bibliographique

RevueResearch-Technology Management · 2000
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueInnovation and Knowledge Management
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMultinational corporationPaceGlobalizationBusinessProduct (mathematics)Order (exchange)CorporationMarketingInternational tradeEconomicsFinance
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Multinational companies from United States, Europe, and Asia are accelerating pace of their direct investments in overseas R&D. As we observed in our latest report to United States Department of Commerce, Globalizing Industrial Research and Development, more than 100 multinational companies have acquired multiple laboratories abroad and are increasingly tapping into these laboratories for new sources of technologies (see p. 61, this issue). Impressive as raw data are, however, we believe their real significance lies in what they reveal about evolution of R&D globalization. Previously, companies expanded their R&D operations overseas primarily to support local manufacturing and marketing operations. But now, companies are making overseas investments to complement their domestic research, technology and product strengths. Overseas R&D operations are thus becoming important sources of new science and technology for entire global corporation. For example: A large Canadian multinational invests in an R&D laboratory in U.S. in order to strengthen Canadian parent's technological and new product development base in wide-area networking products and remote access solutions in telecommunications industry. A Japanese R&D organization searches U.S. for leading-edge electronics and imaging technology to complement its expertise in optics. A European pharmaceutical company invests in U.S. drug/biotechnology industry in order to expand its pipeline for new products and to access expertise in biotechnology research. Companies like these do more than simply acquire science and technology. They are integrating their domestic and overseas R&D facilities into global R&D networks. Integration Worldwide We see this move from simple geographic expansion to integration as representing a new stage in global management of R&D, defined in a 1996 study by Industrial Research Institute and Massachusetts Institute of Technology as the ability of technology development organization to recognize and respond to technology and market signals from all strategically important locations. Eleanor Westney, principal investigator for IRI/MIT study, noted that globalization was both a core competence and a process. We expect this competence to be even more critical for this new stage. The United States appears to be major host-country beneficiary of globalization of R&D. According to Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. affiliates of foreign companies spent $19.7 billion on R&D in United States in 1997, compared with $6.5 billion in 1987. Since 1987, R&D expenditures of U.S. affiliates of foreign companies have increased at an annual average rate of 11.6 percent or more. Lion's Share to United States Moreover, U.S. has received lion's share of inward foreign direct investments in R&D and is host to a large and growing number of foreign-affiliated R&D laboratories. In 1997, there were 695 R&D facilities in U.S. owned by 363 foreign parent companies from various countries, including Japan, Germany, United Kingdom, France, Netherlands, Switzerland, and South Korea. The U.S. is not only a major beneficiary of foreign-funded R&D but continues to be a major source of R&D investments abroad and of expatriate R&D funding. United States companies increased their R&D spending abroad from $5.2 billion in 1987 to $14.1 billion in 1997, representing nearly 11 percent of R&D performed in United States. Similarly, U.S. companies have established or acquired R&D laboratories abroad. The Department of Commerce identified 84 U.S. companies with 186 R&D facilities abroad in 1997 (88 in Europe, 45 in Japan, and 26 in Canada). These R&D facilities cover a wide range of industries, including computer hardware, computer software, consumer electronics, motor vehicles, pharmaceuticals, consumer products, and chemicals. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,011
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,024
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,061

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0110,017
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0030,005
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,014
Communication savante0,0240,039
Science ouverte0,0020,010
Intégrité de la recherche0,0050,010
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0160,005

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,033
Tête enseignante GPT0,328
Écart entre enseignants0,295 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations11
Publié2000
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueResearch-Technology ManagementMême sujetInnovation and Knowledge ManagementTravaux en français237 207