MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009374909 · doi:10.1108/itp-06-2019-0290

Key competencies for big data analytics professions: a multimethod study

2020· article· en· W3009374909 on OpenAlexaff
Ajax Persaud

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Technology and People · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityBig dataBusiness analyticsKnowledge managementAnalyticsPublic relationsPsychologyBusinessData scienceMarketingComputer sciencePolitical scienceBusiness model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This study aims to identify the precise competencies that employers are seeking for big data analytics professions and whether higher education big data programs enable students to acquire the competencies. Design/methodology/approach This study utilizes a multimethod approach involving three data sources: online job postings, executive interviews and big data programs at universities and colleges. Text mining analysis guided by a holistic competency theoretical framework was used to derive insights into the required competencies. Findings We found that employers are seeking workers with strong functional and cognitive competencies in data analytics, computing and business combined with a range of social competencies and specific personality traits. The exact combination of competencies required varies with job levels and tasks. Executives clearly indicate that workers rarely possess the competencies and they have to provide additional training. Research limitations/implications A limitation is our inability to capture workers' perspectives to determine the extent to which they think they have the necessary competencies. Practical implications The findings can be used by higher educational institutions to design programs to better meet market demand. Job seekers can use it to focus on the types of competencies they need to advance their careers. Policymakers can use it to focus policies and investments to alleviate skills shortages. Industry and universities can use it to strengthen their collaborations. Social implications Much closer collaborations among public institutions, educational institutions, industry, and community organizations are needed to ensure training programs evolve with the evolving need for skills driven by dynamic technological changes. Originality/value This is the first study on this topic to adopt a multimethod approach incorporating the perspectives of the key stakeholders in the supply and demand of skilled workers. It is the first to employ text mining analysis guided by a holistic competency framework to derive unique insights.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations87
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformation Technology and PeopleSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207