MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893051876 · doi:10.5430/jms.v9n4p10

The Impact of Big Data on SME´s Strategic Management: A Study on a Small British Enterprise Specialized in Business Intelligence

2018· article· en· W2893051876 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
João Florêncio da Costa ́Júnior, Julio Rezende, Eric Lucas dos Santos Cabral, Davidson Rogério de Medeiros Florentino, Adolfo Rebouças Soares

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Strategy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBig dataBusinessStrategic managementStrategic planningBusiness intelligenceKnowledge managementProcess managementCitizen journalismMarketingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present article seeks to describe how Big Data impacts on SMEs strategy, focusing both on planning and the use of strategy tools. It is a result of a participatory and practical action research in a small British Company ($2.5 Million annual turnover) specialized in business intelligence, conferences and tradeshows during 2014 to 2017. Throughout the research period, Big Data had a profound and multifaceted impact on the strategy and operations of the company, resulting in the changing of its products, adoption of new and more dynamic CRM systems, rethinking of the strategic tools utilized by the senior management and definition of new long term strategic goals. As a conclusion, it was noted that cultural predisposition to adopt Big Data technologies had a defining influence over the course of the strategic planning and operations; as the strategy for Big Data has to go beyond simply implementing technological changes – it actually has to exist before the adoption of new technologies is even considered – demanding commitment from the senior management team as well as the operational side of the business.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and StrategySame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207