MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Strategic Management of Emerging Technologies

2018· article· en· W2818189627 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rahul Kapoor, Riitta Katila, Marvin B. Lieberman, Willy C. Shih, Scott Stern, David J. Teece, Joshua S. Gans, Sohvi Heaton, Joshua Lathrop, Jason Rathje

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Technological Innovation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmerging technologiesGovernment (linguistics)Emerging marketsProductivityCompetitive advantageRelevance (law)MarketingBusinessManagementPolitical scienceEconomicsComputer scienceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Innovation is widely regarded as a crucial source of competitive advantage in an increasingly uncertain environment. More recently, we have witnessed a substantial rise in interest in emerging technologies in business that have the potential to reshape the economy and boost productivity across all sectors and industries. However, achieving successful development of emerging technologies holds great uncertainty requiring strategic management. Many emerging technologies involve a direct upfront cost, while their benefits may be long-term and unquantifiable, and thus increase the level of uncertainty in establishing market relevance. More theoretical development needs to be done to link higher, macro levels to organizational and individual levels. Studying emerging technologies has critical managerial and policy implications. We are particularly interested in how the consideration of such technologies changes or challenges our theories, methods, and research questions. The proposed symposium seeks to bring together papers that address these issues. Abstraction, Knowledge Flows, and the Rapid Dissemination of Emerging Technologies Presenter: Willy Shih; Harvard Business School Complement, Substitute, or Impediment: Is Government Money Smart Money for Private Innovation? Presenter: Jason Michael Rathje; Stanford U. Presenter: Riitta Katila; Stanford U. Understanding and Managing Uncertainty Surrounding Emerging Technologies Presenter: Rahul Kapoor; U. of Pennsylvania Profiting from Enabling Technologies: A Dynamic Capabilities Perspective Presenter: David J. Teece; U. of California, Berkeley Presenter: Joshua Lathrop; Berkeley Research Group Presenter: Sohvi Heaton; LMU Autonomous Vehicle Technology's Potential to Drastically Transform the Competitive Landscape Presenter: Marvin B Lieberman; UCLA Anderson School of Management Choosing a Technology Strategy Presenter: Joshua Gans; U. of Toronto Presenter: Scott Stern; Massachusetts Institute of Technology

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicEconomic and Technological InnovationFrench-language works237,207