MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229078554 · doi:10.36941/ajis-2022-0072

Information Technology Governance in the Tunisian Banking Industry: An Exploratory Study

2022· article· en· W4229078554 on OpenAlexaff
Saida Harguem, Karim Ben Boubaker, Houcine Echatti

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Technology Governance and Strategy
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceBusinessGlobalizationDelphi methodInformation governanceExploratory researchAccountingInformation technologyProcess (computing)Financial servicesService delivery frameworkCompetition (biology)Good governancePublic relationsService (business)MarketingInformation systemFinanceEngineeringEconomicsPolitical scienceManagement information systemsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information Technology (IT) has become the foundation for supporting and sustaining businesses. IT strategic importance has prompted many organizations to extend Governance to IT and place it high on their agendas. Banks are among those organizations that heavily use IT to enhance their service delivery capabilities. Besides, globalization, competition, and compliance requirements pushed banks to consider IT Governance as part of their overall corporate governance strategy. Past studies have shown that IT Governance in the financial industry is more mature than in other sectors. However, there is little information about IT Governance in economically developing nations. This article conducted a Delphi study to evaluate the Perceived Efficiency and Ease of Implementation of IT Governance practices in the Tunisian banking industry. The results show that compared with Process and Relational Mechanisms, Structural Practices are perceived to be more effective and easier to implement. This research helps to understand better the current state of IT Governance Implementation in less developed countries. Received: 30 November 2021 / Accepted: 19 March 2022 / Published: 5 May 2022

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)0.003
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic Journal of Interdisciplinary StudiesSame topicInformation Technology Governance and StrategyFrench-language works237,207