Research and Development Innovation of Consumer Digital Participation – A Double Case Study from the Perspective of Collaborative Evolution between Enterprises and Consumers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Existing research in the business sector has given rise to different views on the relationship between customer participation and the innovation of products by enterprises. This paper examines the contribution of two forms of customer involvement to new product development (NPD) with a consideration of its challenges. This study identifies a firm's experimental learning approach as a condition that affects its ability to manage the challenges of continuous innovation and continuous innovation (CIS) and thus influences their effects on NPD outcomes; contrasting the conditional effects of CIS and CIC to understand how they work differently in influencing new product outcomes; and examining the potential substitutive relationship between CIS versus CIC versus a new product financial performance. The findings provide important implications for firms' decision-making regarding customer involvement in NPD. Overall, this study provides new empirically supported insights into the customer participation and customer knowledge on company product innovation performance, thus adding important results to literature, and thereby providing companies with practical implications on how they achieve the most effective results.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it