Effect of the university’s entrepreneurial orientation on the academic’s entrepreneurial propensity
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
This article addresses the following research question: does the entrepreneurial orientation of a university influence the entrepreneurial propensity of its academics? To answer this question, the authors conducted a two-phase study. First, based on a literature review of the entrepreneurial university and Nelles and Vorley’s theoretical framework on entrepreneurial architecture, they developed a conceptual model and research instrument to assess academics’ perceptions of the characteristics most likely attributed to the entrepreneurial university and their effects on an academic’s entrepreneurial propensity. Second, the authors used the research instrument to conduct a pilot study of the effect of a Canadian university’s entrepreneurial orientation on its academics’ entrepreneurial propensity. The pilot study, using the proposed methodology with detailed accounts of collecting, analyzing and interpreting the data, suggests that the proposed methodology is appropriate for measuring the relationship alluded to in the research question. Furthermore, the methodology can help university leadership in designing possible interventions to correct identified deficiencies in the university’s entrepreneurial architecture to stimulate academic entrepreneurship on campus.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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