MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1151655021

Developing dynamic design capabilities in software product development companies

2006· other· en· W1151655021 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTampere University Institutional Repository (Tampere University) · 2006
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicProduct Development and Customization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftwareBusinessProduct (mathematics)New product developmentComputer scienceProcess managementManufacturing engineeringSoftware engineeringEngineeringMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study employs the theory of dynamic capabilities within the resource-based view (RBV) theory of the firm and introduces a new concept dynamic design capabilities. The concept of dynamic design capabilities in this study is defined as a set of design and development capabilities of a [software] product development firm such as, experiences, skills, metaphors, languages, shared understandings, routines, mutual adjustment, and organizational rules and procedures that is adaptive to the external changes and is creative in delivering superior values to the firm and to the customers. Accordingly, the study introduces a conceptual model, drives hypotheses, and questions whether the development of dynamic design capabilities in software product development firms has significant and positive relationships with the review of similar product designs in the market and the involvement of lead users throughout product design and development processes or not? To address the research question, measure constructs for dynamic design capabilities, review of similar product designs in the market, and the involvement of lead users and lead customers are designed and developed. To collect quantitative data for these constructs, an online survey is conducted on 52 software product development firms in Canada. The target population of the survey is small and medium-sized software product development firms that design and develop software products, intended for a mass-market of individual or organizational end users. To triangulate the findings of the quantitative survey with the findings of a parallel study, 4 case studies are conducted on software product development firms in Canada and Finland. Then, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) method is employed to assess the scale acceptability and to test the research model and the hypotheses. The statistical analysis on the quantitative data and the findings of the case studies show that the development of dynamic design capabilities has significant and positive relationships with the review of similar product designs in the market and the involvement of lead users throughout the product design and development processes. This study, by introducing the new concept of dynamic design capabilities and empirically testing the implication of the concept to software product development firms, contributes to the body of knowledge in software product business and theory of the firm. The study also provides practical insights to practitioners and product development and project managers. \n\n\nKeywords: Theory of the Firm, Dynamic Capabilities, Lead Users, Dynamic Design Capabilities, Software Product Development Companies

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.157 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it