MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1481014802

Linking IT to Business Metrics

2004· article· en· W1481014802 on OpenAlexaff
Heather A. Smith, James D. McKeen, Christopher T. Street

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Technology Governance and Strategy
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness analysisMindsetNew business developmentVariety (cybernetics)Business ruleBusinessBusiness activity monitoringBusiness relationship managementProcess managementArtifact-centric business process modelIncentiveBusiness transformationBusiness processInvestment (military)Electronic businessBusiness process modelingMarketingComputer scienceBusiness modelEconomicsWork in process
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early efforts to link measures of IT investment with measures of business performance have often been challenged to show consistent organization-level relationships. Managers and researchers alike have often concluded in the past that the relationship between what is done in IT and what happens in business is considerably more complex than originally thought. It has long been argued that technology is not the major stumbling block to achieving business performance, but rather it is the business itself – the processes, the managers, the culture and the skills – that makes the difference. Therefore, a good business metrics program that considers not only IT investments but also how the business uses IT is important. If a business measurement program is carefully designed, properly linked to an incentive program, widely implemented and effectively monitored by management, it is highly likely that business performance will become an integral part of the mindset of all IT staff and ultimately pay off in a wide variety of ways.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.110
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.110
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0190.028
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.014
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.221
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation Technology Governance and StrategyFrench-language works237,207