Bibliographic record
Abstract
A considerable body of literature has emerged in recent years that has documented the increasing importance of innovative practices in small business firms within the United Kingdom. Much of this literature has developed in response to reports that UK firms were underperforming in the area of innovative practices in comparison to firms in other countries. The present paper asserts that an inextricable link exists between innovation and marketing, particularly in the field of new product development, and seeks to generate a clearer picture of the characteristics of both innovative owner‐managers and innovative businesses. On the basis of data drawn from a sample of 233 small and medium‐sized businesses in greater London, archetypes of innovative entrepreneurs and businesses are developed. The typical innovative business owner is shown to be young to middle‐aged and is willing to take risks and embrace new technologies. The typical innovative business is in the start‐up stage of development and is in the possession of a current business plan and markeing plan. The implications of these archetypes are discussed, as are concerns regarding how best to measure innovation and to evaluate the role of innovation in relation to small businesses.
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 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 | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".