Bibliographic record
Abstract
The theme of the Third Klein Symposium on the Management of Technology originated in research that my Penn State colleagues and I undertook for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).The Manufacturing Extension Partnership within NIST has responsibility for enhancing the productivity and effectiveness of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the United States.These firms are defined by the US Department of Commerce as having 500 or fewer employees.A major premise underlying our research was that SMEs must become more innovative in order to compete effectively in the emerging global economy.Recent entrepreneurial start-ups already have this capability and can serve as role models for others, but many SMEs (97 per cent of all exporting firms in the US) are not innovative and face increasing competitive pressure from low-cost foreign producers.Operational efficiency is necessary but not sufficient to compete in such a world.Differentiated and less price-sensitive products are becoming increasingly important to competitive success.When our research began in 2003, I was a relative newcomer to the study of SMEs and, more specifically, to aspects of internationalization, which include importing, exporting, foreign direct investment and strategic alliances to sell products abroad.An extensive international network of scholars has been writing in this field for years and has produced a significant body of literature.My colleagues and I faced a steep, but fascinating, learning curve.When exploring themes for the Third Klein Symposium, the idea of linking its theme to our continuing NIST work seemed quite natural and promised great synergy.It also implied hard work and the opportunity to work with a new community of scholars, and ideally to form some new lasting friendships.Thirty-two academics were invited to write papers for the symposium that was held at Penn State on 12-14 October 2005.The invitations included a list of issues and questions to serve as catalysts for what these academics might like to address.As appropriate for a symposium that concerned the global economy, the academics included representatives from the United States, United Kingdom, Italy, Canada and Singapore.The first two days of the symposium were devoted to brief overviews of the papers, and to comments and critiques of them.Authors were expected to revise their papers accordingly.On the third day of the symposium, senior executives from the public and private sector were invited to present their experiences with internationalization or their views on the role of SMEs in the global economy.Their presentations were made to a large and more general audience.Four of the presenters were winners of US federal or state awards for exceptional export performance.Two Canadian firms were recognized as among the 'Top 100 Employers' and/or '50 Best Managed Companies' in Canada.The Dean's Office of the Smeal College of Business contributed financial support for this day of executive presentations.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".