MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407009311 · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2025.01.011

Innovation capabilities decoded: Risks and rewards in small and medium enterprise performance

2025· article· en· W4407009311 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Management Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Research University Higher School of Economics
KeywordsBusinessIndustrial organizationRisk analysis (engineering)MarketingProcess managementComputer scienceOperations managementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Innovation capabilities form the basis for firms’ adapting to changing external environments and creating and sustaining competitive advantage. Yet we still know relatively little about the impact of the distinct types of innovation capabilities on firm performance and its reliability. Grounded in the organizational capability view of innovation, our study is the first to propose a theoretical framework linking the three distinct types of firm innovation capabilities (customer-, marketing-, and technology-focused) with the characteristics of the resulting performance distributions (level and variability) of small and medium enterprises. The presented empirical results reveal that distinct types of innovation capabilities have dramatically different risk–reward payoffs. In particular, customer-focused innovation capability improves the performance level while also rendering it unreliable. Marketing-focused innovation capability does not have a significant impact on firm performance, yet noticeably augments its variability. Finally, technology-focused innovation capability stabilizes performance without affecting its level.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.557
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.218 · 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