Modeller för val av internationella marknader : Varför valde Target den Kanadensiska marknaden?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Running a business today, in any part of the world, will in somewhat make you familiar with the word “international”. Whether it is your customers, funds, products, websites, or supply-chain, influences from around the world will affect your business. Borders and nationalities are getting less meaningful, which makes it easier for companies to internationalize and find opportunities all over the world. The purpose of this thesis was to investigate whether there would be possible to make a generalization of the international market selection (IMS) process for companies and to investigate why Target Corporation chose Canada as their first internationalization decision. The findings of the thesis shows that a generalization of used IMS theories cannot be made, even though they all share some fundamental assumptions. Moreover, Target chose Canada due to multiple factors, though the key factor seems to be psychic distance. Target did, however, both contradicted and adapted IMS models in their internationalization process.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it