MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970015857 · doi:10.12660/joscmv6n1p106-121

Does the Institutional Context Shape International Operations Strategy? Country-Level Analysis

2013· article· en· W1970015857 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vitor Fabian Brock, Iuri Gavronski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Operations and Supply Chain Management · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScarcityContext (archaeology)BusinessIndustrial organizationStrategic managementInstitutional theoryProcess (computing)MarketingKnowledge managementEconomicsManagementComputer scienceMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent literature has proposed that institutions play a pivotal role in corporate andbusiness strategies. We argue that this role holds for manufacturing strategy as well. Despite extensiveliterature regarding international operations management (OM), few studies verify how importantvariables in OM vary across different institutional contexts. This scarcity of comparative crosscountryresearch reveals an important gap both for research and practice. In this paper we addressthis gap by providing a data analysis of a recent survey collected in Canada and Brazil. We replicateand extend previous research by comparing important variables of manufacturing strategy in thesetwo institutional contexts such as knowledge exchange, green process management, environmentalsupplier management and the traditional manufacturing performance dimensions.DOI: 10.12660/joscmv6n1p106-121URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.12660/joscmv6n1p106-121

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Operations and Supply Chain ManagementSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207