MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101655780 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v4n4p191

An Empirical Evidence of Performance Measurement of Audit Firms in Malaysia

2011· article· en· W2101655780 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohd Noor Azli Ali Khan, Rohaizat Baharun, Kamaruzzaman Abdul Rahim, Norhayati Zakuan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Teknologi Malaysia
KeywordsAuditBusinessProfit (economics)Performance measurementAffect (linguistics)Control (management)AccountingEconometricsOperations managementStatisticsMarketingComputer scienceEconomicsMathematicsPsychologyMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the method applied by Bumiputera audit firms to measure their performance, and the factors or variables that affect the firms’ performance. Performance measurement consists of rules for assigning a value to objects or events in such a way as to represent quantities, qualities or categories of an attribute. In view of the importance of performance measurement as a planning and control mechanism, this exploratory study has been carried out. Data was collected through survey questionnaires, which were distributed by the non-probability sampling method. Among the 32 firms selected, only 29 firms measured their performance. The performance measurement approaches used by those firms are increased in the number of clients, comparison of annual income and comparison of annual profit. The result also reveals that customer factor is the main factor that affects the performance of the Bumiputera audit firms.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207