Process innovativeness in technology services organizations: Roles of differentiation strategy, operational autonomy and risk‐taking propensity
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper examines the effect of differentiation strategy on process innovativeness in technology services organization (TSOs). In addition it examines the direct and moderating effects of two organizational constructs— operational autonomy and risk‐taking propensity . Analysis of data from 102 firms in the mid‐Atlantic region of the USA indicates that both differentiation strategy and operational autonomy are positively related with process innovativeness, while an organization's risk‐taking propensity has no such relationship. In addition, operational autonomy moderates the relationship between differentiation strategy and process innovativeness, while no evidence was found for the moderating effect of risk‐taking propensity on this relationship. Further sub‐group analysis shows that in TSOs with high levels of operational autonomy, risk‐taking propensity has a positive moderating effect on the above relationship. Post hoc analysis also establishes positive links among process innovativeness and firm performance.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it