MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317788236 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v16n2p40

Polis University after the Lean Startup

2023· article· en· W4317788236 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elona Karafili, Peter Nientied

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBusiness and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbidexterityEuropean commissionRelevance (law)Work (physics)ManagementLean manufacturingSociologyStrategic managementBusinessBusiness administrationPolitical scienceMarketingKnowledge managementEngineeringEconomicsEuropean union

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2015, the article ‘Polis University as a Lean Startup Innovation’ was published in this journal. The present article is a sequel, researching how the follow-up phase after the initial startup has evolved. The purpose of this article is to: i) review Polis University management since the startup phase in terms of lean, entrepreneurial management, and ambidexterity; and ii) examine strategic directions for the future of the university. The article explains Polis University’s management of new and existing business opportunities, and observes that, like so many other organizations, daily business management and incremental improvement tends to receive the most attention. Ambidexterity is organized both structurally through the establishment of an Innovation Factory, and contextually – expecting from staff that they continuously improve their work. Regarding the university’s strategic direction, we conclude that Polis University adheres to the aim of bearing relevance for society, identified by European Commission for the future of universities. Polis University was started with the mission to be relevant for society – not only through providing education and conducting research, but also through its envisioned positive impact on Albanian and Western Balkan development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0000.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicBusiness and Economic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207