Долговременная конкурентоспособность компаний: основные вызовы
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The loss of competitiveness by global companies that held leading positions in their industries and had significant core competencies for a very long time highlights a need for the analysis of such a phenomenon as long-term competitiveness. The aim of the research is to discover major causes of the loss of competitiveness. The goals include the detection of breaking points that force companies to remold their business activities aswell as the determination of factors that bring about the emergence of breaking points. The subject of sustainable competitiveness relates to both economics and management. That is why numerous theories including the neoclassical one, the institutional one etc. are applied to the study. The research methods include the case-study method as well as structural and comparative analysis. The study of 33 companies (from the USA, Canada, Germany, Sweden, China, South Korea and Japan) in five industries helps to reveal the most common breaking points as well as to determine and classify the internal and external factors that lead to them. The internal factors include crises of growth, diversification crises, innovation crises, reputation crises etc. The external ones include political, technological, economic and natural problems. The authors of the paper reach the conclusion that the loss of competitiveness by a company happens as a result of combined influence of internal and external factors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.097 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".