Ubuntu or Botho African Culture and Corporate Governance: A Case for Diversity in Corporate Boards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to provide a theoretical analysis on the relationship between nationality/ethnicity and compliance with international best practice corporate governance principles. Using Hofstede-Gray cultural-accounting dimensions, the paper attempts to demonstrate that the Ubuntu/Botho culture may in some instances promote/not promote compliance with international best practice corporate governance principles because of the value system(s) of this culture. In view of this, the paper further attempts to present a case for diversity in corporate boards and executive management to enhance corporate compliance with best practice corporate governance principles, performance, disclosure etc. in line with the literature and theoretical arguments on diversity.On one hand, this paper provides future research an opportunity to empirically assess the relationship between corporate compliance with international best practice and nationality/ethnicity (Ubuntu/Botho culture). Future research could also investigate whether the Ubuntu/Botho values hold true today in view of the autocratic regimes in the African continent which have perfected a culture of impunity, corruption and bad governance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".