MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1730855035

Managing technological change in manufacturing SMEs: a multiple case analysis

2014· article· en· W1730855035 on OpenAlexaffabout
Louis Raymond, Pierre‐André Julien, Jean-Bernard Carrière, Richard Lachance

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Technology Management · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessTechnological changeProcess (computing)Manufacturing sectorIndustrial organizationKnowledge managementOrganizational changeProcess managementComputer scienceEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Managing technological change has become one of the critical determinants of organizational performance, if not of survival, for many a small and medium–sized enterprise (SME) in the manufacturing sector. It has thus become important for researchers to better understand how these firms adopt and implement new technologies. This paper presents a case study analysis of the technology adoption decision in 14 Canadian enterprises. Based on an analytical framework comprising 85 factors regrouped into 18 variables, three distinct profiles are identified in terms of strategic advantage, technological expertise, the decision–making process and organizational capabilities. These results confirm that there is no 'one best' strategy of technological change for SMEs.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Technology ManagementSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207