MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148836842 · doi:10.1002/smj.322

Determining the scope and impact of market orientation profiles on strategy implementation and performance

2003· article· en· W2148836842 on OpenAlex
C. Brooke Dobni, George A. Luffman

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStrategic Management Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)Market orientationContext (archaeology)BusinessPerspective (graphical)Industrial organizationCompetitive advantageOrientation (vector space)MarketingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Strategy implementation and performance in organizations are influenced by its market orientation. Market orientation is the collective of employee behaviors that affects strategy implementation, how an organization interacts with its environment and adjusts to changes within that context. The relationship between market orientation, strategy implementation, and performance is robust across environmental contexts. This study identifies ideal behavioral profiles for organizations seeking to maximize performance by considering the scope and impact of market orientation on strategy implementation. This is accomplished by considering market orientation and strategy profiles in relation to performance in a holistic coalignment perspective, corresponding to competitive contexts characterized by varying degrees of market turbulence and competitive intensity. Important strategic and performance implications of this dynamic are revealed that should be considered by academics and practitioners alike. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.270 · 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