MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997851612 · doi:10.1108/02651330210425033

The use of multiple export channels by small knowledge‐intensive firms

2002· article· en· W1997851612 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Marketing Review · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessArgument (complex analysis)Industrial organizationMarketingService (business)Database transactionTransaction costUpstream (networking)Distribution (mathematics)Diversity (politics)Computer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A transaction cost analysis model of the situations in which small knowledge‐intensive firms use multiple distribution channels to serve a foreign market is developed. The central argument is that integrated modes are generally preferred, as they facilitate protection of knowledge‐based assets and the provision of high levels of customer service and support. However, it is hypothesised that either plural or hybrid selling may be used, if assets can be protected in other ways, as a response to environmental diversity, when sales volumes are sufficient to support multiple channels, and in relatively mature markets, where sales growth has started to plateau. Data gathered from Canadian software developers generally support these propositions. The results help the managers of knowledge‐intensive firms to identify some of the circumstances in which multiple export channels might be deployed to enhance sales performance in a foreign market.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.700
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.186 · 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