MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410133089 · doi:10.1111/radm.12768

How Entrepreneurs Absorb Knowledge Spillovers During Innovative Product Development: Evidence From <scp>UK</scp> Start‐Ups

2025· article· en· W4410133089 on OpenAlexaff
Marco Cuvero, Maria L. Granados, Alan Pilkington, Richard Evans, Wai Wai Ko, Maria Bortnovskaya, Catherine L. Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueR and D Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbsorptive capacityBusinessIndustrial organizationPerspective (graphical)Knowledge managementSpillover effectNew product developmentStart upPhase (matter)Product (mathematics)High techMarketingComputer scienceBusiness administrationEconomicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This study examines the impact of knowledge spillovers on product innovation performance within UK medium to high‐tech start‐ups. We propose a conceptual model that explains the relationship between incoming and network knowledge spillovers, potential and realized absorptive capacity, and exploratory and exploitative innovation performance, considering technological turbulence. Based on a PLS‐SEM analysis of 556 UK‐based medium to high‐tech start‐ups, our results show that during the potential absorptive capacity phase, start‐ups focus on acquiring incoming and networked knowledge spillovers. However, the exploitation of network knowledge spillovers occurs during the realized absorptive capacity phase. These findings contribute to the current understanding of the role of knowledge spillovers in absorptive capacity, while from a practical perspective they provide start‐ups with guidance on optimizing and exploiting knowledge spillover based on their firms' characteristics.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.288
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.212 · 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.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueR and D ManagementSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207