MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037079851 · doi:10.5539/ijms.v4n5p47

Identifying Factors Influencing Entry Mode Selection in Food Industry of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) in Iran

2012· article· en· W2037079851 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mahdi Haghighi Kaffash, Maryam Haghighikhah, Hamidreza Kordlouie

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marketing Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessInternationalizationOrder (exchange)MarketingProduction (economics)Sample (material)Industrial organizationResource (disambiguation)Mode (computer interface)Process (computing)Domestic marketTarget marketEconomicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As internationalization increases in today’s business society, it becomes ever more important for individual business to keep us with the development. The way a company ventures from its domestic market to new geographical markets and selecting the right entry modes are important decision that demands a lot of resources and planning. In the process of selecting entry modes a wide range of factors must be taken into consideration before making the final decision. To provide a better understanding of the impact of some internal and external factors on Iranian SMEs in food industry we chose a conceptual framework from Root and studied its variables in our sample. This model states that a) target country market factors, b) target country environmental factors c) target country production factors and d) home country factors as external factors and e) country production and f) company resource/commitment factors as internal factors have impact on the process of choosing entry modes. In order to collect data we use questionnaire. Our findings illustrated that all of the factors were mentioned in Root’s model had impact on selecting entry modes to a foreign country.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marketing StudiesSame topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207