MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1879295150 · doi:10.1111/fare.12014

Family Communication and Innovativeness in Family Firms

2013· article· en· W1879295150 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

VenueFamily Relations · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFamily Business Performance and Succession
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConformityTypologyConversationFamily businessPsychologyConceptual modelBusinessEntrepreneurial orientationSocial psychologyMarketingSociologyEntrepreneurship

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This conceptual article seeks to address the heterogeneity of family firms in terms of their innovativeness by investigating business family communication dynamics. We use the established family communication constructs of conversation and conformity orientations to develop a typology of family firms in terms of innovativeness. We provide empirically testable propositions and present possible operationalizations for future research. In particular, we argue that supportive business families (i.e., families characterized by high conversation orientation and moderate conformity orientation) are associated with the highest levels of innovativeness in the family‐controlled firm. Through this article we hope to deepen our understanding of the relationship between family and firm levels of analysis, to develop a stronger bond between communication and innovative behavior, and to identify family‐related antecedents of heterogeneity in family firm innovativeness .

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.205 · 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