MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2902870474 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v11n12p78

A Correlational Analysis to Assess Major Obstacles Associated with the Internationalization of Saudi Startup Enterprises

2018· article· en· W2902870474 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Megbel Aleidan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternationalizationDistrustBusinessEmerging marketsMarketingIndustrial organizationInternational tradeFinancePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Startups’ constant tendency to grow and scale up through internationalization is occasionally collided with a number of barriers in the domains of legalization and regulation, market and customer, environment and competitiveness, information and knowledge, resources and accessibility, and economy and culture. The sharpness of these barriers might intensify when it comes to startups from emerging markets. Consequently, a need for assessing the major obstacles associated with the internationalization of emerging markets’ startups is emphasized. In this regard, a correlational analysis has been used to identify and assess the role of these obstacles in restricting Saudi startup enterprises to operate internationally. A total of 103 participants were included in the data collection process of the study from Saudi startup enterprises. The findings have shown that liability of foreignness, managerial dispute and organizational distrust, and immaturity of home market were the most influential barrier towards internationalization process of SMEs. Coping implications were suggested to mitigate the impact of each barrier and possible avenues for future research in the area of startups’ internationalization were recommended.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business Research→Same topicInternational Business and FDI→French-language works237,207→