MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021023910 · doi:10.1504/ijccm.2009.023601

From secondary innovation to total innovation management – with the case of small and medium enterprises

2009· article· en· W2021023910 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Qingrui Xu, Jin Chen, Bin Guo, Litian Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Chinese Culture and Management · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Social Science Fund of ChinaInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsImitationInnovation managementBusinessChinaIndustrial organizationInnovation processPortfolioSpace (punctuation)Open innovationCommerceMarketingWork in processPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the evolutionary process of technology innovation and innovation management in Chinese enterprises since 1950. After a brief introduction of innovation environment in China, the transition from imitation to improvement and innovation, which is the vital technological development avenue for most of Chinese firms, is emphasised. To accomplish such innovation path efficiently and effectively requires the paradigm shift for secondary innovation to portfolio innovation during 1980s to 1990s. At the end of last century, the new paradigm of innovation, i.e. total innovation management (TIM), appeared in Chinese firm, which not merely emphasise the integration between technological innovation and non-technological innovation, but also includes all innovators and all time-space innovation. Case studies and survey results were discussed as the evidence of TIM in both large firm (as Haier) and SMEs. Finally, some brief remarks to emphasise the way of innovation taken by Chinese firms in the last 50 years.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Chinese Culture and ManagementSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207