How ICT-Sector Firms are Perceived to Respond to Business-Stakeholder Engagement Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explores how managers and leaders of the information and communications technology (ICT) firms perceive receptiveness of start-up, growth, or mature developmental stage organizations toward ‘corporate social responsibility’ (CSR), ‘creating shared value’ (CSV), and ‘creating value for all stakeholders’ (VAS) business- stakeholder engagement models. Drawing from the three fundamental tenets of stakeholder theory, defined as ‘jointness of interest’, ‘cooperative strategic posture’ and ‘rejection of a narrowly economic view of the firm’, we found that the start-up, growth, and mature stage ICT-sector firms are perceived to be at least receptive toward VAS, CSR, and CSV models, respectively. These exploratory findings are important as they suggest that even though a society that seeks to encourage technology companies to broaden their range of stakeholders for innovation, such as their communities or the environment, they might best direct instrumental change toward start-up firms as appreciative of VAS model - even if these new firms require some time to develop perspectives of ‘jointness of interest’ as they strive to become growth or mature firms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".