The Effect of Product Introduction Delays on Operating Performance
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
This paper provides empirical evidence on the effect of product introduction delays on accounting-based measures of operating performance. Based on a diverse set of 450 publicly traded firms that experienced product introduction delays, we find that delays have a statistically significant negative effect on profitability. Depending on the method used to estimate abnormal performance, the median abnormal decline in return on assets (ROA) ranges from 2.70% to 3.44% over a three-year period around the year of the delay announcement. The median decline in sales over assets ranges from 5.92% to 10.99%, and the median decline in return on sales ranges from 1.48% to 3.06%. Cross-sectional regression analysis indicates that the impact of delays on abnormal ROA is more negative for smaller firms, and for firms that are more profitable before the delay. Furthermore, the impact is more negative for firms that operate in industries that are larger and more profitable. We also find a positive association between abnormal ROA and abnormal stock price performance around the product introduction delay announcements.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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