MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903534708 · doi:10.1108/tcj-12-2017-0112

From start-up to expansion: Vittrium Building Products

2018· article· en· W2903534708 on OpenAlexaff
Charles Krusekopf, Alice de Koning, Rebecca Wilson-Mah

Bibliographic record

VenueThe CASE Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Strategies and Innovation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryRoyal Roads University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarketingEntrepreneurshipStrategic managementLeverage (statistics)Product (mathematics)BusinessBusiness modelCapstone courseMarketing strategyNew product developmentCapstoneComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synopsis After three years in business together, Des Carpenter and Kees Schaddelee had a decision to make – should they double the size of their location, based on the opportunities and competitive threats they perceived? The startup phase took longer than expected and access to distribution channels was more difficult than expected. Nonetheless, the business gained traction with online sales that proved the concept of custom-made counters using EnvironiteTM technology was viable. As they prepared to expand the business, the owner-managers needed to decide on a growth strategy that would let them leverage their strengths. In analyzing their successes so far, they needed to evaluate their business model including their product line, target markets, marketing strategy (including the pricing strategy, product lines, and channels of distribution) and operations. Research methodology Data were collected through interviews with business owners and a review of company documents, production processes and the company website. Relevant courses and levels This case exercise will suit strategy and entrepreneurship students at both the senior undergraduate level and graduate level. The case discussion will ask students to consider operations, supply chain management, marketing and other issues, all through the lens of a holistic vision for the company. This case may be taught as an example of a growth strategy or a business model in a capstone business strategy course or higher level entrepreneurship course. It is appropriate for both undergraduate seniors and graduate students. Theoretical bases This case may be taught as an example of a growth strategy or a business model in a capstone business strategy course or higher-level entrepreneurship course. The case may be used to help students understand external and internal analysis, identifying the sources of value creation and competitive advantage, and creating an appropriate strategy for growth. It provides a rich context to discuss and apply the following conceptual tools: the application of a value chain analysis and the application of a business model canvas (key partners, key activities, key resources, value propositions, customer relationships, distribution channels, customer segments, cost structure and revenue streams). The case may also be used to reinforce the applications of growth phases in a young firm that are part of the entrepreneurial setting, for example, value proposition, ideal customer, revenue streams and key performance indicators.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueThe CASE JournalSame topicBusiness Strategies and InnovationFrench-language works237,207