How market orientation and outsourcing create capability and impact business performance
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract For most firms, developing the capability to compete and perform is crucial. The literature suggests that market orientation and outsourcing are two such sources for building capabilities in the marketplace. However, the relative contribution of market orientation and outsourcing to capability and superior business performance is unclear. To bring clarity, two pathways through which market orientation and outsourcing build capability and enhance business performance are proposed. Using data from foreign and Indian firms, the results indicate that both market orientation and outsourcing contribute to building capability, and that outsourcing further contributes to business performance. Also, it was discovered that low‐risk market‐oriented and high‐risk outsourcing firms experienced a positive impact on business performance. The implication of these results for managers is that market orientation and outsourcing can be complementary tools in their efforts to build capability, enhance business performance, and manage risky environmental conditions. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it