MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414559335 · doi:10.55942/pssj.v5i9.686

The influence of individual readiness to change on the rise of blackberry LTD

2025· article· en· W4414559335 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Felix, Darren Lee

Bibliographic record

VenuePriviet Social Sciences Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiverse Educational Innovations Studies
Canadian institutionsPortage College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive industryPhoneMobile phoneThe InternetFocus (optics)SoftwareProduction (economics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article extensively explores BlackBerry Ltd. ’s fall and rise, charting its path from a dominant hardware production company in the mobile phone devices industry to its current focus on the software and cybersecurity industry. It delves deeply into the strategy of individual readiness to change undertaken by John Chen, the new CEO, to navigate the swiftly changing market and technological landscapes. Under the leadership of CEO John Chen, who took the helm in 2013, BlackBerry pivoted successfully toward enterprise software, particularly in the areas of cybersecurity, automotive systems, and Internet of Things (IoT) technologies. Moreover, it assesses the implications of the transformations for BlackBerry Ltd. ’s positioning in its newfound operational domains, highlighting both the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for the company within the cybersecurity and software services sectors. This is an in-depth exploration of BlackBerry Ltd. ’s strategic evolution and John Chen's quest to transform the company's future. This analysis demonstrates BlackBerry Ltd. ’s ongoing commitment to motivating its readiness to change and embrace new opportunities in an ever-changing market.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePriviet Social Sciences JournalSame topicDiverse Educational Innovations StudiesFrench-language works237,207