MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Entrepreneurial Competencies in the Creative Industry: A Study with Music Professionals

2020· article· en· W3046013666 on OpenAlexaff
Tatiane Brum de Oliveira Reis, Amarolinda Zanela Klein, Danilo C. Dantas

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)EntrepreneurshipCreative industriesFace (sociological concept)Knowledge managementBusinessProcess (computing)PsychologyPedagogyMarketingPublic relationsSociologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the importance of the creative industry for the economy and the need for entrepreneurship education in this area (DCMS, 2001; UNESCO, 2013), there is still a limited understanding of the content and methods to be used in teaching entrepreneurship to creative industry professionals (Damásio & Bicacro, 2017; Matetskaya, 2015). The present research aims to understand the needs and ways of learning of creative industry professionals, regarding the development of their entrepreneurial competences. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 Brazilian musicians who have their own businesses. The results indicate that most musicians learn best through practice, searching for information and learning contents on Youtube and face difficulties to concentrate while learning. Regarding the learning needs of entrepreneurial competences, management skills, especially time management and organization, stand out. The article contributes to the understanding of entrepreneurial competences and learning in the creative industry. It brings evidence about the learning process of creative professionals (musicians) and reveals main development needs of entrepreneurial competences in this context.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207