MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Key Success Domains for Business-IT Alignment in Cross-Governmental Partnerships

2013· book-chapter· en· W1943377047 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roberto Santana Tapia, Pascal van Eck, Maya Daneva, Roel Wieringa

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2013
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Technology Governance and Strategy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Strategic alignmentPoliticsContext (archaeology)Knowledge managementGovernment (linguistics)Process (computing)ArchitectureBusinessProcess managementPublic relationsPolitical scienceComputer scienceStrategic planningMarketingStrategic financial managementGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Business-IT alignment is a crucial concept in the understanding of how profit-and-loss organizations use Information Technology (IT) to support their business requirements. This alignment concept becomes tangled when it is addressed in a socio-political context with non-financial goals and political agendas between independent organizations, i.e., in governmental settings. Collaborative problem-solving and coordination mechanisms are enabling government agencies to deal with such a complex alignment. In this chapter, the authors propose to consider four key domains for successful business-IT alignment in cross-governmental partnerships: partnering structure, IS architecture, process architecture, and coordination. Their choice of domains is based on three case studies carried out in cross-governmental partnerships, in Mexico, The Netherlands, and Canada, respectively. The business-IT alignment domains presented in this chapter can guide cross-governmental partnerships in their efforts to achieve alignment. Those domains are still open to further empirical confirmation or refutation. Although much more research is required on this important topic for governments, the authors hope that their study contributes to the pool of knowledge in this relevant research stream.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicInformation Technology Governance and StrategyFrench-language works237,207