MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7008910475

Creating a Structured Technology Scouting Approach for Operations Development - A Case Study Within a Multifaceted Global Industrial Company

2025· other· en· W7008910475 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLund University Publications Student Papers (Lund University) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)Context (archaeology)Function (biology)Plan (archaeology)Action planOrder (exchange)Information technologyTechnological change
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current fast paced technological innovation demands major attention from businesses across the globe. AI dominates discussions one day, and the next it is all about quantum computing. To remain competitive companies must constantly be on the watch for trend shifts and technological advancements. In order to stay ahead of the curve companies can utilize technology scouting to monitor the technological horizons. Alfa Laval has recently begun developing their technology scouting efforts within their manufacturing department, to leverage technological advancements to their advantage. The aim of this thesis is to identify barriers within Alfa Laval’s technology scouting function and deliver insights regarding potential improvements. The thesis is made in context of Alfa Laval’s manufacturing department but aims to be generally applicable to all forms of technology scouting within the organization. By conducting a literature review, several insights on best practices and theoretical optimal scouting organizations were found. To complement this information, a series of interviews were conducted with employees at Alfa Laval which gave insight into the current situation at Alfa Laval. Lastly interviews were conducted with employees at other global industrial companies which resulted in a broader knowledge of what practices are currently in use. The information received during interviews was then clustered and analyzed together with academic theory, which resulted in a plan of action in the form of a roadmap. The recommendations from this roadmap were to educate employees and formalize the technology scout role. This is closely followed by the implementation of standard documents, and internal databases. By implementing these steps, it will increase transparency within the organization, increase the amount of external scouting and improve the ability to align scouting efforts with business strategy.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 venueLund University Publications Student Papers (Lund University)French-language works237,207