MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981753628 · doi:10.1177/1476127019883669

Top management team time horizon blending and organizational ambidexterity

2019· article· en· W2981753628 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStrategic Organization · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbidexterityUpper echelonsHorizonBusinessSample (material)Time horizonChief executive officerTeam compositionDiversity (politics)Knowledge managementJoint (building)Strategic managementMarketingIndustrial organizationOperations managementManagementComputer scienceEconomicsSociologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We focus on the strategic implications of executive time horizons on a top management team. We argue that time horizon mean and diversity individually and interactively influence organizational ambidexterity, that is, a firm’s joint exploitation of current competencies and exploration of new opportunities. Drawing on the chief executive officer and top management team interface literature, we propose that effective CEO temporal leadership will enhance the joint effects of top management team time horizon mean and diversity on organizational ambidexterity. We tested our hypotheses by conducting multiple runs of surveys on a sample of 146 Chinese small- and medium-sized firms. Our study contributes to upper echelons theory and temporal research on strategy, being the first to examine the strategic consequences of top management team time horizon composition.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.216 · 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