MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W304280970

A "Flat Earth" Effect in IT Pay?

2005· article· en· W304280970 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lauren Bielski

Bibliographic record

VenueABA banking journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOutsourcing and Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationGlobalizationOutsourcingBusinessManagementEngineeringMarketingPolitical scienceEconomicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Outsourcing raised a ruckus in media about a year ago. More recently, subject was touched on in a book by Thomas Friedman called World is Flat, A brief history of 21st Century (he of Lexus and Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization fame). Citing international workforce's wage dampening impact here in U.S., book stimulated chatter at water cooler and fed a certain breed of blogger--and pundit--since its early spring publish date. Yet, is everyone on flat earth wavelength? haven't read book so I can't comment on it, says David Foote, principal, Foote Partners, LLC, New Canaan, Conn. company tracks base and certification pay for technology workers by analyzing data from 1,800 organizations in North America, U.K., and Europe. But if you're asking me, how are U.S. IT workers faring right now, I'd say pretty well. They are generally a happy group. They realize they are well paid and, for most part, that they are doing interesting work, Foote adds. As a for instance, a few certification areas experiencing pay growth in last year include applications development, programming languages, networking, systems administration and engineering network operating systems, and database administration. That is, experienced tech workers, typically working in a line of business environment, possessing those certifications took home more pay than non-certified counterparts, as well as workers with other kinds of specialties. (By way of explanation, certification tends to arise in tech component niches where a single vendor such as Microsoft or Oracle, for instance, dominates. Noncertification areas may not be any less complicated to master, but because of their multi-vendor, market-connoted generic nature, and lack of dominant programs, they don't have a formal way to indicate mastery. These skills also tend to lose their value to workers faster, in terms of attracting additional pay.) Not all certifications saw gains. pay in project management, security, and beginner areas brought in less for IT workers this year. (Explaining, Foote says, Security and project management are as important as they have always been, but supply is beginning to catch up with demand in those areas.) There is also confusion with job titles, which don't tend to match job content in fast-moving world of IT job sourcing. This makes it all more difficult to get a sense of compensation, workload trends, and other market realities. Still, Foote doesn't have sense that U.S. IT workers are either troubled by overwork (they are used to it) or paltry wages (they still make a pretty penny in this field.) Foote tends to believe that jobs lost to offshoring are replenished by more interesting jobs at home and that outsourcing is adopted, then rejected, in cycles. In fact, his opinion is that the miracle of U.S. economy has always been its ability to create new positions and a compelling business environment. In terms of what his data shows, and what he feels comfortable talking about, Foote emphasizes that offshoring and outsourcing deals are only two of many factors that are gradually altering types of projects that information technology workers are doing and how much they are being paid. Recession makes certs count Certainly, IT professionals--as with those in other fields--have had no picnic in recent years with recession and curtailed project work. This is where certification paid dividends. Certification pay, on whole, rose in value during recession and this was partly because certification justified value of an IT worker, Foote says. In days when every item line on every project needed to show a rapid return on investment, it only made sense to justify what workers received additions to base pay and year-end bonuses. The recession put a freeze on project work and it forced a stricter emphasis on IT budget, agrees Carmi Levi, senior research analyst, Info-Tech Research Group, London, Ontario, Canada. …

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0140.010
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueABA banking journalSame topicOutsourcing and Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207