The Value of Product-enabled Services in Top R&D Spenders in Canada and Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is based on an empirical study addressing the value of product-enabled services in top R&D spenders from Canada and Europe. The focus is on product-driven firms for which new service development is particularly challenging. Existing literature on the value attributes of hybrid value offers is mostly conceptual and needs to be further developed through empirical studies. The research sample used in this work consists of 83 product-driven firms that were selected from the list of the top 100 R&D spenders in 2011. Several combinations of keywords linked to different aspects of service value were generated and used to search for their presence online on companies’ websites. Factor analysis was used to identify groups of keyword combinations that were interpreted in terms of specific service value attributes. It was applied separately to the Canadian and the European samples of firms. The results show that the main service value attributes for Canadian firms are: better service effectiveness, higher market share, higher service quality, and customer satisfaction. The service value attributes for the European firms of the sample include, among others, product added-value, product modernization and optimization of customer time and efforts.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".