MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Innovation for Inclusive Growth: Towards a Theoretical Framework and a Research Agenda

2012· article· en· W1864567609 on OpenAlexaff
Gerard George, Anita M. McGahan, Jaideep Prabhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEconomic and Social Research Council
KeywordsCommercializationConstruct (python library)EntrepreneurshipValue (mathematics)Innovation processInequalityInclusive developmentValue creationOutcome (game theory)Process (computing)MarketingBusinessSociologyEconomicsIndustrial organizationEconomic growthMicroeconomicsComputer scienceWork in processMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

abstract Inclusive innovation, which we define as innovation that benefits the disenfranchised, is a process as well as a performance outcome. Consideration of inclusive innovation points to inequalities that may arise in the development and commercialization of innovations, and also acknowledges the inequalities that may occur as a result of value creation and capture. We outline opportunities for the development of theory and empirical research around this construct in the fields of entrepreneurship, strategy, and marketing. We aim for a synthesis in views of inclusive innovation and call for future research that deals directly with value creation and the distributional consequences of innovation.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.041
Scholarly communication0.0160.019
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations879
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management StudiesSame topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207