MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043932874 · doi:10.1007/s11187-009-9250-2

What happens to gazelles? The importance of dynamic management strategy

2010· article· en· W2043932874 on OpenAlexaff
Simon C. Parker, David Storey, A. van Witteloostuijn

Bibliographic record

VenueSmall Business Economics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipSet (abstract data type)EconomicsStrategic managementKey (lock)Point (geometry)Industrial organizationMicroeconomicsEmpirical evidenceBusinessMarketingManagementEcologyComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The starting point of this study is Gibrat’s Law, which is contrasted with strategic management. This logic is subsequently applied to a group of remarkably dynamic, high-growth firms: gazelles. Strategic management theory emphasises the importance of firms adjusting strategies in response to changes in the external environment. In our study, it is used to explain several key empirical findings using a novel British data set containing information on more than 100 gazelles. These findings help explain: (1) why Gibrat’s Law of random firm growth processes does not generally hold, (2) which strategy and environmental variables have a predictable influence on firm performance and (3) why routine application of ‘best practice’ strategies is unlikely to foster firm growth in a changing economic environment. In so doing, this paper contributes to the large body of literature on small-firm growth.

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)0.016
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations292
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmall Business EconomicsSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207