MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7113905603 · doi:10.69557/ax11h224

A relational digital capability cascade: how sensing, agility, and innovation drive B2B performance

2025· article· W7113905603 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCollaboration in agile enterprises
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital transformationAgile software developmentInterdependenceSupply chainSurvey data collectionMarket orientationMechanism (biology)Position (finance)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital transformation reshapes how B2B firms sense market changes, respond to disruptions, and innovate with partners, yet many organizations struggle to convert digital investments into performance gains. This study develops and tests a relational digital capability cascade explaining how Information Technology Capability (ITC) enables Digital Market Orientation (DMO), how DMO drives Digital Agility (DA) and Supply Chain Innovation (SCI), and how these interdependent capabilities influence performance. Using survey data from 248 Canadian B2B firms and Structural Equation Modeling, the results show that ITC strongly enhances DMO, which significantly improves agility and collaborative innovation. Agility boosts both SCI and performance, while SCI emerges as the most powerful predictor of performance. A feedback learning mechanism is also validated, demonstrating that agility enhances subsequent sensing by refining how firms interpret digital signals. The findings position digital transformation as a cyclical capability system rather than a linear sequence, showing that sensing, acting, and innovating reinforce one another. This research offers a holistic framework for how B2B firms can integrate digital infrastructure, agile decision routines, and cross-partner innovation practices to achieve superior performance.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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 topicCollaboration in agile enterprisesFrench-language works237,207