MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312243761 · doi:10.24043/isj.406

The impact of CEO characteristics on the international entrepreneurship of small island-based firms

2022· article· en· W4312243761 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Guido Rojer, Karen Watkins-Fassler, Rebeca de Juan Díaz, Anoop Rai

Bibliographic record

VenueIsland Studies Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllegianceEntrepreneurshipProbit modelSample (material)AccountingOrdered probitProbitEconomicsBusinessDemographic economicsPolitical scienceFinanceLawEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the impact of CEO characteristics on the International Entrepreneurship (IE) of listed island-based firms (IBFs) during the period 2009-2018. The research considers 164 companies from a sample of eight small islands with securities exchanges including more than one firm headquartered on the island. The selected islands are: Barbados, Cyprus, Fiji, Iceland, Jamaica, Malta, Mauritius, and Trinidad & Tobago. Framed on the upper echelons theory and social network theory, the influence on IE of CEO’s tenure, academic background and achievement, family allegiance, and international exposure is studied, taking into account the small island particularities. Through a binary probit model, it is concluded that CEOs’ family allegiance, tenure, and academic background (if the CEO majored in Business Administration, Finance, Accounting, or Economics) are negatively related with IE, while CEOs’ academic achievement and international exposure are positively associated with IE. Some of these results are atypical in the existing literature; nevertheless, islandness can explain these results. The conclusions attained suggest new theoretical and empirical lines of IE research for IBFs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIsland Studies JournalSame topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207