MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012188010 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v11n2p262

Entrepreneurial Orientation in Government-Owned Bank: Do They Improve Competitive Advantage?

2020· article· en· W3012188010 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maryono Maryono, Imam Ghozali, Amie Kusumawardhani, R. Mahelan Prabantarikso, Firdaus Basbeth

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSMEs Development and Digital Marketing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProactivityEntrepreneurial orientationCompetitor analysisBusinessGovernment (linguistics)Competitive advantageMarketingEntrepreneurshipPopulationIndustrial organizationFinanceEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Indonesia, housing finance is mainly raised from banks, with the government-owned housing bank (GOHB) BTN taking the largest share of the market. In constantly growing population need for new housing unit every year and increased number of competitors requires managers of government-owned housing bank to be able to develop their dynamic capabilities and adopt a more entrepreneurial orientation (EO). However, (GOHB) are typically being linked to organization that administratively influenced by government that impeding GOHB from being high performance organization driven by EO. Moreover, the dual goals of GOHB which are business and social goals makes the managers struggle to develop and adopt entrepreneurial orientation, since they have to set priorities and trade-off between those goals. The aims of this study is to investigate the role of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) in improving competitive advantage of government-owned housing bank, and fills a gap in the literature by linking entrepreneurial orientation to the theory of dynamic capabilities. This study explored the mediating effect of multi-dimensional EO which is: innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk taking in the relationship between dynamic capabilities (DC) and competitive advantage. The method of the study is a survey using area sampling and proportionate random sampling to collect data from 115 managers in 20 branches in island of Java, during the month of May to August, 2018 (cross-sectional method). The result shows a positive relationship between dynamic capabilities to innovativeness, proactiveness and risk taking. As expecting risk taking has no mediating effect to competitive advantage.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.382
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicSMEs Development and Digital MarketingFrench-language works237,207