Metis : Creativity Of Global Virtual Teams Applied To New Product Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the process by which Global Virtual Teams (GVTs), namely groups of geographically dispersed and culturally diverse members, carry out most of their activities using information technology. Three case studies have been conducted and will be described here. These studies investigate specifically the creative process stages of GVTs and other factors susceptible to affect team members work whilst designing a creative product. The first case study is composed of university students organized in GVTs and taking part in the main Intercultural Virtual Project. The two other case studies are conducted at Capgemini and Lafarge companies, their aim is to shed light on organizational complexity of GVT within companies involved in R&D. The Intercultural Virtual Project is connected to a broader range of studies conducted to understand better the specificity of our Western Creativity based on Mediterranean Culture, namely Metis. Seven stages within the creation process, namely: preparation, incubation, generation, emanation, selection, finalization, and evaluation. The overall innovation will be described as successive interactions between the Global Virtual teamsâ conscious and unconsciousâ creative processes in order to develop a new product. GVTs creativity depends also on emergent states and processes: technology appropriation, group awareness and group memory. Furthermore three managerial levers were identified: contiguity, proximity and reflexivity. These levers include useful procedures in order to enhance the creative process.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".