MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130150862 · doi:10.1109/bdim.2006.1649206

The 5 C Challenges of Business-Driven IT Management and the 5 A Approaches to Addressing Them

2006· article· en· W2130150862 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompromiseContext (archaeology)Computer scienceProcess managementKnowledge managementAdaptabilityInformation and Communications TechnologyRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessWorld Wide WebManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To summarize to business people the main challenges of business-driven information and communication technology (ICT) systems management, we suggest "the 5 C challenges of ICT systems management": 1) cost-benefit relationship, 2) complexity, 3) conformance to higher-level objectives, 4) circumstances and their diversity, and 5) change. We also advocate the slogan "To address the 5 C challenges you need at least the 5 A approaches and a compromise." Here, the "5 As" are the main approaches for addressing the "5 Cs": 1) analysis of benefits and costs, 2) automation of management activities, 3) aims (objectives, policy) modeling and processing, 4) accommodation of different circumstances through customization and context-sensitivity, and 5) adaptability. We also discuss how these 5 Cs and 5 As relate to self-management, policy-based management, and contract-based management and how they can be used for presenting a new project on modeling and using business value information.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.024
Scholarly communication0.0260.019
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0110.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.087 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBusiness Process Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207