Managing Joint Ventures
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- none
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Theoretical or conceptualConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: none
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.886
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.654
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
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
Abstract
Executive Overview Joint ventures aid firms in accessing new markets, knowledge, capabilities, and other resources. Yet they can be challenging to manage, largely because they are owned by two or more parent companies. These companies may have competing or incongruent goals, differences in management style, and in the case of international business, additional complexities associated with differing government policies and business practices. We examine research on joint venture (JV) performance in order to identify prominent academic discussions established over the last 25 years. From this research, we draw implications from past research and areas for future research on successfully managing JVs, taking into account the decisions JV partners must make throughout the partnering process, from initial motivations through partner selection and negotiation of terms to implementation and ongoing management. Key implications include the necessity of honesty, trust, and commitment for the success of the JV, settling disputes by focusing on what is best for the JV rather than individual partner objectives, and division of managerial responsibilities according to the functional expertise of each partner.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Academy of Management Perspectives
- Topic
- International Business and FDI
- Field
- Business, Management and Accounting
- Canadian institutions
- Western University
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- BusinessNegotiationHonestyOrder (exchange)MarketingProcess (computing)Joint ventureJoint (building)Government (linguistics)Public relations
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes