MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059919859 · doi:10.1057/palgrave.emr.1500042

New ventures' inward licensing: examining the effects of industry and strategy characteristics

2005· article· en· W2059919859 on OpenAlexaff
Shaker A. Zahra, Thomas Keil, Markku Maula

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Management Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObsolescenceBusinessNew VenturesIndustrial organizationLicenseFlexibility (engineering)Competitive advantageComplementary assetsMarketingEntrepreneurshipEconomicsFinanceManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract New ventures compete by creating innovative products. Liabilities of newness and inexperience, limited resources, rapid technological obsolescence and constantly changing market conditions often encourage new ventures to license other companies' technologies to complement and augment their internally developed innovations. Building on the knowledge‐based view of the firm, we propose that the intensity of new ventures' use of inward licensing reflects the demands of their industries and competitive strategies. The results of an empirical study of 361 US new ventures show that industry characteristics and competitive strategy influence their inward licensing as a means of lowering costs and maintaining strategic flexibility while building their capabilities.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations28
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Management ReviewSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207