MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118397847 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2021.1.003

The effects of knowledge management and advanced technology on innovative capability

2021· article· en· W3118397847 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Dweiri, Abdallah Shatat

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIntellectual Capital and Performance Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge managementStructural equation modelingOrganizational performanceMediationBusinessService (business)Organizational learningTechnology managementProcess managementComputer scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of knowledge management and advanced technology on innovative capability in order to improve the organization performance. A survey of 200 SMEs in the service industry was conducted. Partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS_SEM) was used to test the mediation role of the service innovation on the relationships between both knowledge management and advance technology and the organizational performance. The results showed there were links between knowledge management and organizational performance. Nevertheless, it was discovered that service innovation mediated the relationship between the knowledge management and cost and financial performance, and between advance technology and cost and financial performance. The paper shows a way forward of how to measures the organizational performance in such a way that they are led from the development of innovation capability generated through knowledge management and the advance technology in the service industry.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicIntellectual Capital and Performance AnalysisFrench-language works237,207