MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390883269 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v25i7.6730

The Influence of Firm Characteristics on the Relationship Between Operational Innovation and Performance of Manufacturing Firms in Kenya

2023· article· en· W4390883269 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zedekia Juma Adhaya, Gituro Wainaina, Stephen Odock

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessCompetition (biology)Sample (material)Industrial organizationReliability (semiconductor)MarketingDescriptive statisticsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With a marketplace characterized by increased competition globally and constant changes in customer needs and wants, there is a need to adopt operational innovations while complying with the business environment (internal capabilities) and the firm characteristics, influencing factors in the innovation adoption and implementation. For this reason, this study aimed to investigate the influence of firm characteristics on the relationship between operational innovation and the performance of manufacturing firms in Kenya. The positivism approach was used to increase the reliability of investigation findings for generalization. Further, a descriptive research design was adopted, equally to increase the reliability of the survey. Sample of 182 firms with strong affiliations to Kenya Association of Manufacturers (KAM) was used. The firms had 14 subcategories based on the products they manufactured. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and smart PLS4 were used for data analysis, and regression analysis was used for conclusive results. The findings reveal that firm characteristics have a sizable impact on the association between innovation and firm performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207