MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Learning orientation and market orientation in international joint ventures

2013· article· en· W1986086420 on OpenAlexaff
Chansoo Park, Yiannis Kouropalatis

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntecedent (behavioral psychology)CentralityMarket orientationStructural equation modelingBusinessPerspective (graphical)Technological changeOrientation (vector space)Industrial organizationMarketingEconomic geographyPsychologyEconomicsSocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates how technological and non-technological innovations in International Joint Ventures (IJVs) are influenced by market orientation and learning orientation dimensions. Our conceptualisation draws on an integrative perspective which acknowledges the centrality of organizational learning and marketing orientation as driving forces behind IJV formation, collaboration and innovation performance. Based on this, we estimate a structural equation model using survey data from 199 Korean IJVs. Results indicate that IJV shared vision is positively related to commitment-to-learning. In turn, commitment-to-learning is found to be a positive antecedent to technological and non-technological innovation. Furthermore, the innovation enabling effects of commitment-to-learning are strengthened when IJV partners interact on a frequent basis. Market orientation is also found to have a significant and positive impact on non-technological innovation, but not on technological innovation.

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)0.011
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207