MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2573959285 · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2016.2619

Industrial Development Through Tacit Knowledge Seeding: Evidence from the Bangladesh Garment Industry

2017· article· en· W2573959285 on OpenAlexaff
Romel Mostafa, Steven Klepper

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTacit knowledgeIndustrialisationBusinessIndustrial organizationEmpirical evidenceDeveloping countryMarketingKnowledge managementEconomicsEconomic growthMarket economyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore how the establishment of an industry pioneer through foreign seeding of industry knowledge can subsequently catalyze the growth of a developing country’s industry by involuntarily propagating the knowledge to subsequent entrants. As industry knowledge has tacit elements, we focus on mechanisms that enable experienced workers from the pioneer to seed the knowledge to new entrants. We examine the relationship between entrants’ characteristics and the mechanisms exploited to access the industry knowledge, and the impact of the mechanisms exploited on firm performance. Empirical findings from two historical episodes in the Bangladesh garment industry suggest that industry knowledge seeding was essential for the initial establishment and subsequent expansion of the industry. Our paper highlights the role of experienced workers’ mobility in building new firm capabilities and provides novel insights into industrialization in developing economies. This paper was accepted by Bruno Cassiman, business strategy.

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)0.004
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.085 · 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

Citations93
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement ScienceSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207