MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113621093 · doi:10.1007/s10843-012-0084-7

The impact of geographic diversification on export performance of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)

2012· article· en· W2113621093 on OpenAlexaff
Jerzy Cieślik, Eugène Kaciak, Dianne H.B. Welsh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Entrepreneurship · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversification (marketing strategy)InternationalizationBusinessEntrepreneurshipIndustrial organizationSmall and medium-sized enterprisesEmerging marketsDimension (graph theory)LocationKey (lock)MarketingEconomic geographyEconomicsInternational tradeFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two alternative diversification strategies—the geographic diversification of export sales and key market concentration—are extensively discussed in management, strategy, entrepreneurship, and economics literature. However, no conclusive evidence currently exists as to how either of these strategies affects the performance of international sales. This paper contributes to a better understanding of geographic diversification as a key dimension of the internationalization process for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). In it, we analyze a comprehensive database of Polish exporters over a 3-year period to better understand the geographic diversification patterns of exporters. Based on this analysis, six propositions emerged from the export patterns examined and two viable strategies for exporting SMEs are identified: (1) concentrating on a single market and (2) a balanced approach aimed at targeting a small number of key markets, combined with a strategy of penetrating other markets. Implications for practice and future research are also discussed herein.

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)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations73
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of International EntrepreneurshipSame topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207