The effect of organisational size and age on position and paradigm innovation
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
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to contribute to knowledge and theory on innovation in small and medium-sized organisations (SMEs) by exploring the role of size and age on organisational engagement with position and paradigm innovation. Design/methodology/approach – Data on organisational characteristics, including age and size, and engagement with position and paradigm innovation was collected as part of a questionnaire based survey of food sector SMEs in the UK. Structural equation modelling was used to identify the existence of any significant relationships between engagement with position and paradigm innovation and organisational age and size. Findings – Findings suggest that organisational engagement with position and paradigm innovation is not affected by either age or size. Originality/value – Prior research, based primarily on process and product innovation, has generated contradictory results regarding whether size or age effect innovation. This study contributes by focusing on the previously unexplored concepts of position and paradigm innovation.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it