MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1923419456 · doi:10.1108/md-04-2014-0208

R & D spending among Chinese SMEs: the role of business owners’ characteristics

2015· article· en· W1923419456 on OpenAlexaff
Yongqiang Gao, Taı̈eb Hafsi

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Decision · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInnovation Policy and R&D
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityBusinessMarketingTobit modelAgency (philosophy)Value (mathematics)Affect (linguistics)Small businessPerceptionStatisticDemographic economicsEconomicsQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – Given that organizational decisions are made by individuals and thus shaped by their subjective and objective characteristics, the purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of SME business owners’ characteristics on their firms’ research and development (R & D) spending in a transition economy. Design/methodology/approach – The authors first build the arguments that, among small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), business owners’ perceived importance of R & D-related activities, their education, related experiences, and social connections, should affect their firms’ R & D spending positively. Then the authors use a Chinese nationwide survey of private SMEs to test the arguments. Tobit regression analyses are conducted by taking Stata 12.0 as the statistic tool. Findings – The authors find that business owners’ perceived importance of R & D-related activities is positively associated with their firms’ R & D spending. In addition, better-educated owners and owners who have technology-related working experience tend to invest more in R & D activities. Finally, owners who have social connections, especially industrial connections, tend to spend more on R & D activities. Originality/value – This study improves the understanding of R & D spending determinants among SMEs. Going beyond general environmental determinants, it reveals the important agency role of SME owners, and thus contributes to a better understanding of how decisions leading to SME innovations are influenced by business owners’ perceptions and demographic characteristics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations33
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement DecisionSame topicInnovation Policy and R&DFrench-language works237,207