Big data for small and medium-sized enterprises (SME): a knowledge management model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Big data has raised challenges and opportunities for business, the information technology (IT) industry and research communities. Nowadays, small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) are dealing with big data using their limited resources. The purpose of this paper is to describe the synergistic relationship between big data and knowledge management (KM), analyze the challenges and IT solutions of big data for SME and derives a KM model of big data for SME based on the collected real-world business cases. Design/methodology/approach The study collects eight well-documented cases of successful big data analytics in SME and conducts a qualitative data analysis of these cases in the context of KM. The qualitative data analysis of the multiple cases reveals a KM model of big data for SME. Findings The proposed model portrays the synergistic relationship between big data and KM. It indicates that strategic use of data, knowledge guided big data project planning, IT solutions for SME and new knowledge products are the major constructs of KM of big data for SME. These constructs form a loop through the causal relationships between them. Research limitations/implications The number of cases used for the derivation of the KM model is not large. The coding of these qualitative data could involve biases and errors. Consequently, the conceptual KM model proposed in this paper is subject to further verification and validation. Practical implications The proposed model can guide SME to exploit big data for business by placing emphasis on KM instead of sophisticated IT techniques or the magnitude of data. Originality/value The study contributes to the KM literature by developing a theoretical model of KM of big data for SME based on underlying dimensions of strategic use of data, knowledge guided big data project planning, IT solutions for SME and new knowledge products.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".