MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010381318 · doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0361

New Directions in Corporate Governance Research

2008· article· en· W2010381318 on OpenAlexaff
Donald C. Hambrick, Axel v. Werder, Edward J. Zajac

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganization Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceVariety (cybernetics)BusinessWork (physics)SociologyOrganization studiesPublic relationsKnowledge managementPolitical scienceManagementEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this essay, we seek to identify the contributions that strategy and organizational researchers have made, and continue to make, in enhancing our understanding of a wide variety of important corporate governance questions. We begin by discussing how these research contributions stem from a willingness to draw from and contribute to different streams of intellectual thought, and we provide an orienting framework to situate this work.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0040.036
Scholarly communication0.0160.049
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0100.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
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

Citations394
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganization ScienceSame topicManagement and Organizational StudiesFrench-language works237,207