MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Final Word on Edith Penrose

2003· article· en· W3122729233 on OpenAlex
Alan M. Rugman, Alain Verbeke

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management Studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic rentMultinational corporationNormativeEconomicsProfit (economics)Neoclassical economicsMicroeconomicsPositive economicsSociologyPolitical scienceLawFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Rugman and Verbeke (2002 ) established that Edith Penrose's contribution to the resource‐based view in strategic management has been misunderstood by many scholars in the field. The present paper augments this analysis, and demonstrates that Penrose did not view the pursuit of rents as a worthwhile endeavour. Penrose did build on a number of conceptual foundations of neo‐classical economics, and accepted the profit‐maximizing assumption as largely consistent with the pursuit of an optimal growth path. But optimal growth, not the pursuit of rents, was the focus of her analysis. In addition, Edith Penrose's real normative agenda was the increase of societal welfare at the macro‐level through innovation at the firm‐level. Penrose's work on multinational enterprises shows that she had a strong preference for eliminating rents that would accrue to large multinational firms at the expense of local firms in host countries.

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.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.232 · 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