Alliance formation issues for knowledge‐based enterprises
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
Inter‐firm collaboration among knowledge‐intensive firms is increasing as a result of accelerating competition, falling regulatory barriers and rising customer expectations. Resource dependency theory is used to position knowledge as the key resource for the knowledge‐based enterprise and to examine the suitability of alliances as a mode of knowledge acquisition and exchange, contrasted particularly with merger and acquisition. The alliance and knowledge literatures are reviewed, and particular attention is paid to the critical alliance formation stage. This stage is reviewed against a research model that posits firm performance in knowledge creation arises from a number of factors, including the motivation for an alliance, partner firm characteristics (the ability to develop and sustain valuable resources; absorptive capacity; combinative capability; experience with alliances; and appropriate design for knowledge exchange), the development of operating structures and norms, and the choice of alliance structure. The paper concludes with suggestions for future research..
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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