MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398762740 · doi:10.1177/10596011241254150

“It’s Not the CEOs, It’s Us”: On the Challenges of CEO Research and a Call for Deeper Engagement

2024· article· en· W4398762740 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGroup & Organization Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic relationsPsychologyBusinessAccountingEmployee engagementManagementPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Much of the upper echelons’ literature presumes that CEOs are unlikely and unwilling to participate in research regarding their roles and decision-making processes. In this opinion piece, we argue that the dearth of research utilizing primary data from the CEO population poses a challenge to the diversity and soundness of scholarship in this field, limiting our own capacity to truly know these crucial informants. Furthermore, we assert that the reluctance of organizational scholars to involve CEOs in their research is rooted in several assumptions that warrant re-evaluation. Drawing from a critical assessment of existing literature and our own experiences, we propose suggestions for effective strategies to engage with CEOs in our research endeavors.

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.

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)0.005
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.786

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.289
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.078 · 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