MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402196821 · doi:10.1504/ijtm.2024.140717

The relationship between 'creative slack' as an intangible asset and the innovative capabilities of the firm

2024· article· en· W4402196821 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Technology Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement, Economics, and Public Policy
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntangible assetBusinessAsset (computer security)Industrial organizationMarketingCommerceKnowledge managementFinanceComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The notion of creative slack purposefully refers to the notion of organisational slack proposed by Penrose (1959), who suggested that managers in organisations always have some stock of unused resources that inevitably accumulate when developing projects and are the primary factors determining the growth and innovation of the firm. In this contribution, we aim at adding a new dimension to the notion of organisational slack. Our view is that in many innovative organisations the slack of unused ideas is essentially a creative one, which is accumulated in diverse communities through multiple projects. This creative slack is a key intangible asset and a source of knowledge creation and innovation. To explain how organisations may benefit from exploiting the creative slack accumulated by communities, we rely on the analysis of two case studies, that of the Hydro-Québec Research Institute (IREQ), and of Ubisoft Montreal.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.267 · 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