MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561663802 · doi:10.1142/s1363919617500396

THE MEDIATING ROLE OF TEAM COLLABORATION BETWEEN PROCEDURAL JUSTICE CLIMATE AND NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PERFORMANCE

2016· article· en· W2561663802 on OpenAlex
Atif Açıkgöz

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Innovation Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNew product developmentBusinessProduct (mathematics)Team effectivenessTeam compositionProcess managementKnowledge managementEconomic JusticeProcedural justicePsychologyMarketingPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The management of innovation and technology (MIT) literature has emphasised several determinants of team collaboration in new product development (NPD) projects. However, the literature lacks the evidence which supports the relationship between procedural justice climate (PJC) and team collaboration in NPD projects. The literature also has limited evidences about the mediating role of team collaboration in NPD projects. To address these gaps, this study collected the data from 133 NPD teams. The results strongly suggest that (i) PJC is positively related to team collaboration, (ii) effective collaboration among NPD team members leads to superior NPD performance, and (iii) team collaboration fully mediates between PJC and the indicators of NPD performance. Suggestions are further made regarding new responsibilities for team leaders.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.302 · 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