MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052215629 · doi:10.1177/107179190301000210

A Dynamic View of Organizational Transformation: The Changing Face of Chinese SOEs Under Transition

2003· article· en· W2052215629 on OpenAlexaff
Justin Tan, David Tan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Leadership & Organizational Studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncrementalismChinaProcess (computing)Face (sociological concept)Dimension (graph theory)Transition (genetics)Economic systemPerspective (graphical)Organizational changeBusinessDynamic capabilitiesEconomicsPolitical scienceIndustrial organizationPublic relationsSociologyPoliticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The controlled process of economic reform in China has attracted growing attention from around the world due to its significance for theory and practice. What has been missing in the literature is the temporal dimension, i.e., the changes over time in key variables such as organizational environment, firm strategic adaptations, and the performance implications, since Chinese reform officially began in 1978. Taking a dynamic systems perspective, and drawing literature from organizational study and thermodynamics, we follow the "staged model" of economic transition to study the changes in organizational environment and firm strategies over the last two decades. We suggest that as the result of more than two decades of well-controlled transitional process characterized by incrementalism, institutional environment has become more conducive to entrepreneurial activities, and consequently, firms responded with more willingness to take risk and innovate. Furthermore, we suggest such process has been escalated by an influx of newly founded firms that bring in added energy and complexity. Finally, we examine the changes leadership profile during transition. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Leadership & Organizational StudiesSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207