MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design or Redesign Business Models' Innovation in the Digital Transformation Context

2022· article· en· W4319978463 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Ratte, Elaine Mosconi, Leandro Feitosa Jorge

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE 28th International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC) & 31st International Association For Management of Technology (IAMOT) Joint Conference · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital transformationContext (archaeology)Transformation (genetics)Business modelComputer scienceModel transformationProcess managementKnowledge managementBusinessWorld Wide WebMarketingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Organizations face the challenge of determining how they should shape and implement innovations driven by Digital Transformation. They face dilemmas about which innovations and changes are needed or put in place before designing or redesigning their business models. Previous research has helped advance the understanding of the digital transformation journey and the development of new business models based on emerging technologies. However, little research studied the key factors that affect an organization's ability to redesign or design business model innovations. This research investigates the key factors contributing to the design of business model innovations in digital transformation. Therefore, this paper presents a theoretical framework of the main factors related to business model innovation design to theoretically fill this research gap. Transformational maturity, resulting from the organization's dynamic capabilities and digital competencies, and corporate culture, seems to contribute to changes in business processes and models. We present research proposals and a framework to help research and practice consider the main factors related to potential business model design according to the level of transformational maturity and the intensity of interpreneurial culture.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0110.013
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE 28th International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC) & 31st International Association For Management of Technology (IAMOT) Joint ConferenceSame topicDigital Transformation in IndustryFrench-language works237,207