MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211124603 · doi:10.17722/ijme.v6i2.823

Determinants of CEO Compensation

2016· article· en· W4211124603 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vivek Khanna

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Management Excellence · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExecutive compensationChief executive officerConformityCompensation (psychology)EconometricsRegression analysisBusinessSample (material)Duality (order theory)Generalized method of momentsPanel dataMarketingAccountingEconomicsManagementStatisticsPsychologyMathematicsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a panel data analysis, the study explores the influence of size of a firm, firm-performance, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) duality and management pattern on CEO compensation. The final sample for the study comprises of a total of 300 Indian companies over a period of three years (2007-08 to 2009-10). The proposed relations are tested using the random-effects generalized least squares regression analysis. The age of the company and industry are introduced as the control variables. In conformity with the proposed hypotheses the analysis reveals that the size of the firm and the performance of the firm have a positive influence on firm performance. However, as regards the management pattern, the analysis reveals an inverse relationship. Further, no relationship is found between CEO duality and compensation. The findings of the study are discussed and implications for the managers are highlighted.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Management ExcellenceSame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207