La performance des PMEs internationales: État des lieux et pistes de recherches futures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Notre étude a pour objectif d’évaluer l’état des connaissances et de formuler un agenda de recherche dans le domaine de la performance des PMEs internationales. Au travers d'une revue de 231 contributions publiées entre 1993 et 2019, nous identifions (i) les principaux débats théoriques (ii) les facteurs clés de succès et mesures de la performance des PME internationales et (iii) les approches théoriques et méthodologiques utilisées dans le domaine. Sur la base de ces analyses, nous proposons une définition des facteurs de performance en fonction des cadres théoriques mobilisés ainsi qu'une vue d'ensemble des déterminants et mesures de performance identifiées dans la littérature. Parmi les voies de recherches futures, nous préconisons une perspective théorique et empirique plus holistique, une approche qualitative et longitudinale ainsi que plus de travaux portant sur des PME issues de pays émergents.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.026 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".