MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129026703 · doi:10.5430/jms.v1n1p47

An Exploratory Study of Differences in Manufacturing Strategy between National and Global Production Firms

2010· article· en· W2129026703 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andreas Größler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Strategy · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduction (economics)Sample (material)Industrial organizationOrder (exchange)BusinessExploratory researchInternational marketManufacturingManufacturing engineeringOperations managementMarketingEngineeringEconomicsInternational tradeMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to explore differences of the manufacturing strategy between plants that produce in a global manufacturing network and such plants that are part of local production only. Both groups of firms serve a worldwide market. As methodology, the paper uses statistical analyses, in particular difference and correlation tests, which are based on data from the fourth round of the International Manufacturing Strategy Survey (IMSS). Major findings are that the two groups of plants differ concerning their order winners, capabilities and performance. Both types of plants exist in substantial quantities within the sample. Based on these results, the paper puts forward a detailed research agenda of manufacturing strategies in international contexts.

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)0.004
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and StrategySame topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207