Distance in International Business: Concept, Cost and Value
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research and teaching volume has been composed in honour of Rosalie Tung, a distinguished institution builder, thought leader and educator in the field of international business (IB). The volume addresses Rosalie Tung's main research focus in a career that has already spanned several decades, namely the analysis of distance facing multinational enterprises (MNEs), with a focus on state-of-the-art conceptual and fact-based empirical developments in the realm of cultural and institutional distance elements. The impact of distance on international business transactions and operations remains ill-understood. How should distance be conceptualized? Which dimensions of distance should be considered? Is distance always a cost, or can it sometimes confer value? This twelfth volume in the Progress in International Business Research series presents extensive accounts of the contemporary scientific debate on how to assess the impacts of distance, both negative and positive ones, on the conduct of international business. This volume covers five dimensions related to the concept, cost and value of distance, in International business: the concept of distance; the cost of cultural and psychic distance; the cost of institutional distance; the value of distance; alternative lenses for IB research
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".