MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1536353914

IT CAPABILITIES AND FIRM PERFORMANCE: A RESOURCE-BASED, ALLIANCE PERSPECTIVE

2007· article· en· W1536353914 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCarleton University's Institutional Repository (MacOdrum Library, Carleton University) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Strategy and Innovation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransaction costAlliancePerspective (graphical)Resource-based viewResource (disambiguation)BusinessIndustrial organizationKnowledge managementDatabase transactionScale (ratio)PhenomenonKey (lock)Information technologyMarketingComputer scienceCompetitive advantageFinanceComputer security
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information technology-based alliances are rapidly spreading in organizations, which calls upon researchers to develop an adequate theoretical lens to examine this phenomenon and its key associated outcomes, such as the business performance of alliance firms. However, strategic alliances are mostly examined from a transaction cost economics perspective, and the results on performance are inconclusive at best. This paper proposes an alternative lens - the resource-based view - and applies an extended version of it to explain the performance of firms in IT-based alliances. A conceptual model is developed that examines the impact of shared information technology resources on firm performance. Also, a measurement scale for these resources is developed and preliminarily validated.

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), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.006
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.165 · 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