Bounded rationality, capital budgeting decisions and small business
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
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide insight into the capital budgeting decision-making of Canadian and Mexican entrepreneurs in small businesses in the food sector. The objective is to understand the capital budgeting decisions through the lens of bounded rationality and how these decisions are affected by different (national) contexts. Design/methodology/approach This is a comparative study in which the use of constructivist grounded theory allowed deep conversations about capital budgeting decisions. Data was collected from forty semi-structured interviews with entrepreneurs/managers in two regions, Mexico and Canada. Findings Insights from this study suggest that entrepreneurs’ capital budgeting decisions are not only taken under conditions of bounded rationality but also suggest a prominent role of context in how bounded rationality is applied differently towards investment decisions. Research limitations/implications While the findings cannot simply be generalized, exploring how capital budgeting decisions are made differently across two regional contexts adds to the understanding of the nexus of context, bounded rationality and capital budgeting decision-making. Practical implications Using a bounded rationality lens, this study contrasts and explains similarities and differences in the entrepreneur’s capital budgeting decision-making within small businesses. The insights add to the body of knowledge and help entrepreneurs to reflect on their approach to decision-making. Originality/value The paper uses a less commonly applied approach to understand two under-researched regional contexts. We use constructivist grounded theory to explore entrepreneurs’ capital budgeting decision-making in small businesses in two regions, Canada and Mexico. The comparative approach and the findings add to the understanding of decision-making, highlight the prominent role of context and also challenge some insights from previous 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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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