Strategic Architecture for School of Business, Bogor Agricultural University
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p class="Default">This study aims to analyze the internal and external factors that influence the development of SB-IPB, analyze SB-IPB strategic foresight and designing SB-IPB strategic architecture. This research is a descriptive research in the form of a case study. Respondents in this study are experts from inside and outside of IPB who are policy makers, alumni users, competitors, and alumni. Based on the internal environment analysis, it is found that SB-IPB internal resource advantages will still have the quality of competitive parity, the curriculum will have a temporary competitive advantage, and the reputation will have a sustained competitive advantage. In the external environment analysis, it is indicated that changes in the external environment provides great opportunities to the development of SB-IPB. Important issues that affect the development of SB-IPB in the future will be institutional change, change of mindset in the curriculum, internationalization, and changes in the business world. Five focus strategies will be compiled in 2015 until 2019, they are: development and strengthening of the institution and the curriculum in the first year, strengthening in networking and benchmarking in the second year, internationalization in the third year, and strengthening SB-IPB excellence in the fourth year to achieve its goal to be a first class business school in the fifth year. </p>
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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)
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".