MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2523905261 · doi:10.2308/jiar-51604

Linking Key Performance Indicators to New International Venture Survival

2016· article· en· W2523905261 on OpenAlexaff
Yasheng Chen, Johnny Jermias

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Accounting Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurvivabilityAccounts receivableBusinessSample (material)International joint ventureBankruptcyNew VenturesFinanceProductivityMarketingIndustrial organizationEconomicsJoint ventureEntrepreneurshipCommerce

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Based on the four major challenges firms face in the early stage of their life cycle, we identify and use financial and non-financial performance measures to predict the survivability of new international ventures. We use a sample of 3,729 new manufacturing ventures from the Chinese Foreign Invested Enterprises Database. The study sample consists of wholly owned ventures of multi-national corporations (MNCs) and joint ventures between pairs comprising foreign and local investors in China. The results are consistent with the study's hypotheses. Using the Cox (1972) survival model, we find that employee training, employee productivity, accounts receivable collection period, export intensity, and sales growth are positively related to new venture survival. This study contributes to the existing business venturing and accounting literature in three ways. First, it fills the gap in the existing literature on bankruptcy prediction by focusing on firms in the early stage of their life cycle. Second, it uses survivability as a measure of business success. Survivability is a more comprehensive measure of firm performance than traditional financial measures during the start-up stage because during this stage firms tend to carry large losses that make financial measures inappropriate. Finally, this study has the potential to help new venture managers improve a firm's chances of success by using customized performance measures that fit its unique situation. JEL Classifications: D21; G32; M41.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of International Accounting ResearchSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207