Building Competitive Advantage for Vietnamese Firms: The Roles of Knowledge Sharing and Innovation
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
The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of knowledge sharing (KS) and two specific types of innovation on competitive advantage in Vietnamese firms. Based on using structural equation modeling (SEM) and survey data collected from 225 participants, the findings reveal that KS directly and indirectly affects firm’s competitive advantage through the mediating role of innovation speed and innovation quality. The findings stress the important role of building a positive climate to stimulate employees for sharing knowledge aimed at improving firm’s innovation capability, and sustaining competitive advantage. Future research needs to explore the relationship between three components of knowledge management namely knowledge acquisition, KS, and knowledge application, innovation, and specific aspects of competitive advantage (such as low cost advantage, differentiation advantage, and time advantage) to provide deeper the mechanism of how specifics aspects of knowledge management connected with firm’s certain types of competitive advantage through innovation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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