Girl power: double jeopardy or diversity in action behind boardroom doors in New Zealand?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A dramatic acceleration in “girl power” predicted for the boardrooms of major New Zealand business is examined against the notion that age is a traditional demographic variable influencing board selection. For example, the average age of directors in Canada and the USA is 59 years, with 56 per cent of Canadian directors over 60 years. The paper examines whether there is a generational divide between younger women with higher educational qualifications who have “fast‐tracked” onto boards and older female directors with substantial business experience and expertise and the seniority to dedicate the time to board membership. Six interviews were undertaken with women under 40 years who are directors, and with older women, aged 45 years and over, on the same three boards. Similarities and differences in selection and perceptions of the role are analysed. Whether being young and female is a form of double jeopardy or an expression of boardroom diversity in action is explored.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it