How Collaborative Culture Supports for Competitive Advantage: The Mediating Role of Organizational Learning
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
The paper aims to clarify the influences of collaborative culture and specific aspects of organizational learning on competitive advantage. Structural equations modeling (SEM) is applied to test degree of influence of each variable has on each other through using data collected from 298 participants at 150 large manufacturing and service firms. The result shows that organizational learning act as mediating roles in the relationship between collaborative culture and competitive advantage. Our results indicate that collaborative culture practices will yield significant effects to competitive advantage directly or indirectly through improving specifics aspects of organizational learning. The findings of this study provide a theoretical basis, which can be used to analyze relationships between collaborative culture, specifics aspects of organizational learning and competitive advantage. From a practical perspective, the study brings more deeply understanding for CEOs/managers about the necessary factors to encourage and promote firm’s competitive advantage.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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