MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090041326 · doi:10.1080/09638180701819972

Cybersecurity, Capital Allocations and Management Control Systems

2008· article· en· W2090041326 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Accounting Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Technology Governance and Strategy
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessComputer securityAccountingAuditManagement control systemControl (management)Command and controlAgency (philosophy)Computer scienceEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The design and use of management control systems can play a key role in dealing with cybersecurity issues that have arisen in tandem with the emergence of the Internet. Efficient management control systems will reduce a firm's likelihood of suffering significant losses from cybersecurity breaches. Drawing on and extending the extant agency-based capital budgeting literature, this paper demonstrates the relevance of the study of management accounting controls to problems arising in the cybersecurity setting. The main finding is that firms can use an information security audit (which is an integral part of a management control system) along with adjustments to the compensation payments to the agent and the investment decision rules, to mitigate a Chief Information Security Officer's inherent empire building preferences. The paper also identifies additional research areas where management accountants with expertise in management control systems can contribute to the academic literature and practice surrounding cybersecurity issues.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.186 · 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