MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125107478

Dupont Analysis of an IT-Enabled Competitive Advantage

2002· article· en· W3125107478 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce Dehning, Theophanis C. Stratopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Strategy and Innovation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexCompetitor analysisCompetitive advantageFinancial statementBusinessIndustrial organizationMarketingAccountingFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent research has shown that if used effectively, information technology (IT) can provide companies with superior performance relative to their direct competitors [MIS Q 24 (2000) 169; Inf Manage 38 (2000) 103]. The most common benefits from the successful use of IT are in increased profitability or efficiency. Return on assets (ROA) decomposition (DuPont analysis) allows financial statement users to examine where this IT-enabled competitive advantage shows up in accounting performance measures, whether in profitability, efficiency or both. Using a matched pair design, comparing companies with an IT-enabled competitive advantage to their direct competitors, we find that successful use of IT pays off in a combination of increased profitability and efficiency. This is different from a competitive advantage that is not IT-enabled, where the only performance advantage is in profitability. All data used in tests are available from public sources.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicBusiness Strategy and InnovationFrench-language works237,207