Empirical evidence of the parent company's influence on spin-off: from creation to performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Companies to adapt to today's society, characterized by continuous changes, adopt strategies to search for new opportunities, sometimes emerging business models, different from the parent company's business area. If they do not want to diversify their core business, they choose to create a new company that will be independent from the parent company, the spin-off. The aim of this study is to analyze and analyze the parent company's influence on spin-off performance, in terms of motivating factors for creation, transferred resources, relationship type and spin-off performance in the post-spin-off period. To achieve this objective, 31 surveys were analyzed, answered by workers who occupy management positions in spin-off companies in the USA and Canada. The statistical analysis of the data suggests that the concentration of the business area and the maximization of shareholder value are the main reasons for the creation of the spin-off. The most mentioned spin-off challenges are aggressive competition and efficient allocation of efficient resources. One of the characteristics of the spin-off is that it is an independent company, a fact that is not verified in the sample under analysis. However, the spin-off's performance does not change when it becomes independent.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".