MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171793830 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2012.06.044

A survey on how different factors impact entrepreneurs' success in food industry

2012· article· en· W2171793830 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdoli Ghahraman, Hedayat Tajik, Ehsan Ghasemi, Behrooz Jamali

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessMarketingFood industryIndustrial organizationFood scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present an empirical study to detect important factors influencing the success of entrepreneurs who were active in food industry in Tehran, Iran. The proposed study selects a sample of 174 people out of 318 entrepreneurs who were involved in this industry and distributed a questionnaire, which consists of two groups of questions among them. The first group of questions is associated with personal characteristics of the survey people and the second group of questions are related to different financial, infrastructure and supply chain management categories. The study defines entrepreneurs' mental desirability of success in terms of 15 different questions and asks them to provide their insights in terms of five Likert based responses. The results of questions are analyzed using Pearson correlation test and the preliminary results indicate that, among personal characteristics, education and age play important roles on the success of a business plan. The other observation is that the easier entrepreneurs can get loans and financial support, the higher abilities to absorb new customers and the higher chance of success for absorbing new financial resources. Distributions of sales, compared with competing products as well as distribution of after sales service for customers are negatively associated with infrastructures. The rate of success in using new technologies and supply chain management are correlated, which means the better supply chain, the better achievement to information technology.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.260
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207