MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3031059385 · doi:10.1177/1056492620929085

Hypergrowth Exit Mindset: Destroying Societal Wellbeing through Venture Capital Biased Social Construction of Value

2020· article· en· W3031059385 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Lam, Marc‐David L. Seidel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management Inquiry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPrivate Equity and Venture Capital
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindsetVenture capitalSocial capitalValue (mathematics)Exit strategyPublic relationsBusinessSocial venture capitalMarketingEconomicsSociologyPolitical scienceFinanceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exit! Exit! Exit! Our innovation ecosystems are focused on this goal above all else, thanks to the reliance on venture capital. Young potential entrepreneurs talk about exit strategies before even creating an innovation or starting a business. Our innovation ecosystems push them to do so in many ways. Seemingly straightforward questions to budding entrepreneurs such as “What is your exit strategy?” drastically shift focus and outcomes away from creating long–term societally beneficial innovations. We argue that this hypergrowth exit mindset is destroying societal wellbeing due to its laser focus on increasing socially constructed exit value above all else. As a field we need much more research about the antecedents and consequences of the mindset, as well as research informed alternative innovation models. To address this fertile research area, we call for more research on alternative models of innovation built upon societal wellbeing as opposed to exit valuations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.485
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management InquirySame topicPrivate Equity and Venture CapitalFrench-language works237,207