MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2416749093 · doi:10.1111/1911-3838.12093

Homewonder Ltd: Shareholders Versus Other Stakeholders

2016· article· en· W2416749093 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Flora Niu, Bixia Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting Perspectives · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutsourcingShareholderDilemmaBusinessStakeholderCorporate social responsibilityOffshoringStakeholder theoryMarketingIndustrial organizationCorporate governanceFinancePublic relationsEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Corporate social responsibility involves various economic and social issues. This case presents a dilemma of the trade‐off between economic benefits to shareholders and social benefits to other stakeholders. To respond to recent flat sales growth, as well as serious needs for cost reduction and meeting analysts' expectations, Homewonder Manufacturing Ltd. is considering a strategic plan to expand into Asia. To facilitate this plan, the CEO of the company proposed offshoring and outsourcing some business operations, as well as downsizing the company's current social programs. Various stakeholders will be affected by this plan. This case analysis requires an integration of the shareholder and stakeholder theories of the firm. It provides opportunities for students to consider whether relationships with other stakeholders are a salient corporate strategic concern, and perform costs and benefits analyses arising from this dilemma.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.188 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccounting PerspectivesSame topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207