Value Discipline Dimensions on Organisational Performance and Competitive Advantage: A Study on Pharmaceutical Companies in Diabetes Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Recent studies highlighted the increase of competiveness and fluctuation in pharmaceutical market share, the industry facing tremendous pressure. Hence the sector has the necessity to embrace the goal of delivering their products and services with value. Specifically, diabetes care in the pharmaceutical industry has been an important agenda for providing high quality services and products to the customers in past few decades. Therefore, the present paper critically views the impact of value discipline dimensions on organizational performance and competitive advantage of diabetes care in both developed and developing countries.Design/ methodology/ Approach: This research involves in secondary data collection due to achieving the objectives framed. Moreover, it perceives the association between the variables is not possible, conducting interviews with respondents in both developed and developing countries are also difficultFindings: The finding shows that there is animpact of value discipline dimensions on organizational performance and competitive advantage of diabetes care in both developed and developing countries via secondary data collection method. Research Limitations/ Implications: This study is limited to secondary research and all the findings inferred are from the information available from secondary sources.Practical implications: The impact of value discipline dimensionson organizational performance and competitive advantage of diabetes care is effective in the context of both developed and developing countries.Originality/ Value: Understanding the value discipline dimensions impact on organizational performance and competitive advantage of diabetes care is anew one. Hence this paper proposes this concept in both developed and developing countries perspective.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".