MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2500658269 · doi:10.1002/9781119197959.ch15

Should (Could) You Manage Your Fund Like Harvard or Ontario Teachers'?

2012· other· en· W2500658269 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and Valuation Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPurchasingPensionEndowmentBusinessInvestment (military)Value (mathematics)Investment managementPension fundClosed-end fundFinanceStakeholderAccountingProduction (economics)MarketingActuarial scienceEconomicsManagementMicroeconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter shows how Harvard and Teachers' pass the stakeholder value-creation test both in principle and in practice. It also offers reasons why many other institutional investors, whether pension funds, endowment funds, or other, fail on both counts. Pension assets are usually managed in one place and the benefits administered in another. This segmentation carries through to the determination of the fund's investment policy. Boards of directors should govern rather than manage, understanding which may be the critical divide separating effective boards from ineffective boards. In the investment business, that means allocating a small percentage of net excess returns relative to appropriate benchmarks to the internal management team. Consumer firms have beliefs about how people make purchasing decisions. Technology and health care firms have beliefs about the science behind their production processes.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1710.015

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 head0.224
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.132 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFinancial Reporting and Valuation ResearchFrench-language works237,207