MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415737100 · doi:10.1057/s42214-025-00229-3

Characterizing international services: an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy

2025· article· en· W4415737100 on OpenAlexaff
Kristin Brandl, Peter D. Ørberg Jensen, Patrik Ström, Andrew Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Business Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicService and Product Innovation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersCopenhagen Business School
KeywordsService (business)Conceptual frameworkService delivery frameworkService designInternational relationsKey (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract International services present a challenge for policy work. Their nature resists straightforward characterization, making it difficult to design effective and targeted policies. Research across international business, economic geography, and service management has also grappled with this complexity for years; yet a cohesive, unified, and actionable understanding of international service characteristics remains missing. We examine these complexities with the aim of identifying the central characteristics of international services and how they can be utilized in research and policy. Using three recognized core challenges in international services research as a point of departure, we develop an integrative framework that enables the characterization of all international services for research and policy purposes. The framework consists of four interconnected components: the connectivity of international services to their environment, the configuration of service activities within international organizational setups, the collaborative international interaction between global service actors, and the value creation of international services. We demonstrate how the framework serves as a conceptual tool for research and a practical guide for policy work. We advance international service management research with an interdisciplinary, cohesive, and actionable framework that enables the characterization of international services and policy by providing ways to shape effective global service policies.

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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0150.015
Science and technology studies0.0110.084
Scholarly communication0.0380.041
Open science0.0040.014
Research integrity0.0100.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueJournal of International Business PolicySame topicService and Product InnovationFrench-language works237,207