Customer Knowledge Development: Antecedents and Impact on New Product 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
By enhancing the fit between new product features and customer preferences, the customer knowledge development process fosters new product success. Despite this significant benefit, there is considerable variance in the extent to which firms engage in this process in their new product development projects. This is because not all firms can meet the resource, strategic flexibility, and motivational requirements of the process. In this research, the authors develop a nomological network wherein they identify (1) the organizational actions that enable effective implementation of the customer knowledge development process, (2) the characteristics of new product development projects that moderate the effects of these actions, and (3) the outcomes that are generated by the process. The results from a survey of 165 marketing managers who had recently participated in new product development projects provide substantial support for the nomological network. The authors explore the theoretical and managerial implications that arise from their results and provide future research directions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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