MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099684076 · doi:10.1504/ijbge.2014.066277

Enron and the 12 steps of white-collar crime

2014· article· en· W2099684076 on OpenAlexaff
Randy Appel, Jae Fratzl, Ruth McKay, Carey Stevens

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Governance and Ethics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Insolvency and Governance
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite-collar crimeBankruptcyAccountingCorporate governanceCorporationContemptBusinessWhite (mutation)LawManagementPolitical scienceEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2001, Enron Corporation (Enron) filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection due to accounting irregularities. At the core of the failure was a corporate culture that held in contempt regulatory oversight, financial disclosure and the governance process. This paper applies a 12-step model of white-collar crime (McKay et al., 2010) to the case of Enron. The analysis is based on an interview with Sherron Watkins, whistleblower and former employee of Enron, as well as other coverage of the Enron collapse. This paper presents the value of the model as applied to a single organisation and makes recommendations based on the application.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.217 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business Governance and EthicsSame topicCorporate Insolvency and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207