Formation and Constitution of Effectual Networks: A Systematic Review and Synthesis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The co‐creational processes of effectuation represent an important development in understanding of entrepreneurial action. They also manifest in networks that are themselves important artefactual outcomes of effectual processes. To synthesize research connecting effectuation to the networks involved, this paper offers a systematic literature review. Following recent theorizing, the authors organize the literature around two general themes: (1) why and how network development occurs; and (2) what network develops. The resultant thematic model offers a comprehensive perspective on network development under effectuation logic. The analysis identifies that understanding of effectual networking and effectual networks is fragmented, incomplete and constrained by a lack of construct and contextual clarity. The authors present alternative perspectives on constructs and assumptions surrounding networks in effectuation, integrate network theory into effectuation, and generate important trajectories for future research.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it