MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4378808137 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.180534

A Study on Strategic Entrepreneurship Orientations: Indicators, Differential Pathways, and Multiple Business Sustainability Outcomes

2023· article· en· W4378808137 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muath Maqbool Albhirat, Siti Nur ‘Atikah Zulkiffli, Hayatul Safrah Salleh, Nur Amalina Mohamad Zaki

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityEntrepreneurshipBusinessDifferential (mechanical device)Entrepreneurial orientationSustainable businessProcess managementIndustrial organizationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Awareness of strategic entrepreneurial orientations (SEO) has grown in sustainability research in small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs), and the extant literature includes review studies concerning SEO.Despite the existence of these studies, in the Jordanian context, more research is needed about a parsimonious model that includes the underlying mechanisms linking SEO to multiple sustainability performances.Given such a gap, this study proposes an updated conceptual model of SEO using the Resource-Based View theory (RBV) and Social Capital Theory (SCT) as the theoretical underpinnings.Specifically, this research links SEO to Jordanian SMEs sustainability performance, like economic, environmental, and social practices, through the mediating roles of sustainable supply chain management (SSCM).In addition, a relevant literature search highlights three indicators of SEO: innovativeness, risktaking, and proactiveness.This reviewed conceptual framework was created through a process of qualitative analysis including a synthesis of the literature, analysis, and integration with existing models.A conceptual model has an essential role in the scientific processes.Its purpose is to aggregate evidence, help in understanding phenomena, inform future studies and act as a reference operational index in practical settings.The study also creates avenues for future research and provides theoretical contributions.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning→Same topicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences→French-language works237,207→