MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626190651 · doi:10.17705/1cais.04020

Strategic Alignment in SMEs: Strengthening Theoretical Foundations

2017· article· en· W2626190651 on OpenAlexaff
Chris T. Street, R. Brent Gallupe, Jeff Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications of the Association for Information Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Technology Governance and Strategy
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrategic alignmentBusinessContext (archaeology)Dynamic capabilitiesIndustrial organizationStrategic managementSet (abstract data type)Strategic planningKnowledge managementStrategic financial managementMarketingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are a vital part of the global economy in that they compose the vast majority of all businesses worldwide. In spite of these firms’ importance, they remain understudied in strategic alignment research. In this paper, we consolidate and extend the IS literature on strategic alignment in SMEs. We develop a set of theoretical propositions that outline the ways in which SMEs’ unique characteristics affect their ability to achieve and sustain alignment between their IS/IT strategy and their overall business strategy. In some respects, SMEs can achieve and sustain alignment as larger firms do, while, in other respects, they differ noticeably. We ground each of our propositions in the dynamic capabilities framework to strengthen the theoretical foundations of strategic alignment research, particularly in SMEs. We discuss the implications of our propositions and note theoretical issues emerging from the study of strategic alignment in the SME context.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations48
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications of the Association for Information SystemsSame topicInformation Technology Governance and StrategyFrench-language works237,207