Guidelines for the Deployment of Criteria for Selection of Strategic Projects in Design
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
Strategic projects are selected by executives based on pre-established criteria. These criteria must be deployed for product development so that they can be present as attributes in the development process. In an industrial context, this study identifies criteria that are relevant to executives and meet their expectations about convergence with the strategic vision of their organization, and it sheds light on how these criteria are unfolded to achieve the development of products. A literature review produced a theoretical background about the definition of project selection criteria, and interviews were conducted with executives from different companies for practical reference regarding how the selection process actually happens in organizations. Finally, study groups were formed to discuss the means by which the criteria migrate from managers' expectations to actual products in the development process. As a result, a set of guidelines was compiled so that companies can deploy their criteria to select strategic projects in project attributes and operational actions throughout the product development process.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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