MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072064046 · doi:10.1002/smj.619

International diversification, subsidiary performance, and the mobility of knowledge resources

2007· article· en· W2072064046 on OpenAlexafffund
Yulin Fang, Michael Wade, Andrew Delios, Paul W. Beamish

Bibliographic record

VenueStrategic Management Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityYork University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaYork University
KeywordsSubsidiaryDiversification (marketing strategy)BusinessKnowledge transferIndustrial organizationParent companyKnowledge managementMarketingMultinational corporationFinanceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We examine the link between international diversification, organizational knowledge resources, and subsidiary performance. The success of international corporate diversification depends on a firm's capability to transfer knowledge to its subsidiaries, and how its local subsidiaries effectively utilize that knowledge. As knowledge resources are imperfectly mobile, a firm may find it difficult to transfer knowledge to its subsidiaries. In our analysis of 4964 Japanese subsidiaries over a 14‐year period, we find that knowledge that is valuable, but not rare, positively affects subsidiary performance in the short term, but not the long term. In contrast, knowledge that is both valuable and rare affects subsidiary performance in the long term, but not the short term. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.008
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations206
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrategic Management JournalSame topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207