MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593188597 · doi:10.6000/2371-1647.2017.03.02

Business Development Frameworks for Establishing Innovative Born-Global Firms in Nigeria and Sub-Sahara Africa

2017· article· en· W2593188597 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Patrick Oseloka Ezepue, Nonso Ochinanwata

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advances in Management Sciences & Information Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipDeveloping countryBusinessBusiness developmentFocus (optics)Economic growthKnowledge managementRegional scienceMarketingGeographyEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This conceptual paper explores different approaches for establishing born-global firms (BGFs) in developed and developing countries, with a special focus on Nigeria and Sub-Sahara Africa. It reviews the key constructs and frameworks that underpin new business development in born-global firms. Examples of these constructs are business development, dynamic capabilities, innovation, collaboration, entrepreneurship, and organisational learning. The research is important because of the relative lack of BGFs (Google, Amazon, Alibaba, and Facebook, for example) in Sub-Sahara Africa, compared to other parts of the world. Moreover, the frameworks for BGF new business development can be applied in subtly different ways in developed and developing country contexts. For example, BGFs in developed countries focus on niche products and services with breakthrough innovation, whilst those in developing countries, because of limited resources and capabilities, focus on underserved and mass markets, which do not require high level resources and capabilities. Realistic hypothetical examples of BGFs which directly underpin Nigerian and Sub-Sahara African higher education and economic development are used to illustrate the BGF business development constructs.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.018
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.259 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advances in Management Sciences & Information SystemsSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207