An Empirical Research on the Status and Role of Listed Companies’ CFO in Corporate Governance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on the related information disclosed in the annual report of SSE A-share, this paper makes an empirical analysis of the status and role of CFO in corporate governance. The result indicates that the status of CFO is low in corporate governance, and CFO still plays a traditional role. The result also demonstrates the main factors that determine the status and role of CFO are personal status and seniority. As a result, effective measures must be adopted to enhance the status and role of CFO from the perspective of corporate governance. Key words: CFO, corporate governance, listed companies Resume: A partir des informations revelees dans le rapport annuel de l’action-A de la SSE( Shanghai Stock Exchange/Bourse des valeurs de Shanghai), l’article present procede a une analyse empirique du statut et du role du CFO(Chief Financial Officer) dans la gouvernance de la societe. Le resultat montre que le CFO jouit d’un statut bas dans la gouvernance de la societe et joue encore un role traditionnel, et que les facteurs determinant son statut et role sont ses statut personnel et anciennete. A cet effet, des mesures effectives doivent etre adoptees pour hausser le statut et le role du CFO dans la perspective de la gouvernance de la societe. Mots-Cles: CFO, gouvernance de la societe, societes cotees
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".