VALUE APPROPRIATION AND INNOVATION COLLABORATION DYNAMICS: A REVIEW AND RESEARCH AGENDA
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contemporary innovation management studies on collaboration dynamics and value appropriation lack coherent theoretical articulations and underlying conceptual foundations. It is challenging to manage collaborative value creation without a proper understanding of the dynamic connections between collaboration for and appropriation of innovation. This study conducts a systematic literature review to uncover the dynamic connections between innovation-related value appropriation and collaboration. Topic modelling, a machine-learning-based text analysis method, is applied to a corpus of 270 scholarly articles to uncover relevant elements. Additionally, 77 articles are selected for an in-depth content analysis to examine the elements in a more detailed manner. With these steps, the study contributes to the literature by illustrating and elaborating the role of dynamics of collaboration in value appropriation, and vice versa.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it