MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CEO’s Dark Triad Personality Traits and Their Effect on Ambidexterity in SMEs

2024· article· en· W4400442810 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Javad Esmaeili Nooshabadi, Audra I. Mockaitis, Richa Chugh

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbidexterityDark triadBig Five personality traitsPsychologyTriad (sociology)PersonalityBusinessSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bridging entrepreneurship and organizational behavior, we hypothesize that involvement in ambidextrous activities within small or medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is influenced by the dark triad personality traits (narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism) of the respective chief executive officers (CEOs). The existing body of research has indeed overlooked the influence of the CEO’s psychological characteristics. Using a sample of 385 SMEs from the United Kingdom, the United States, Ireland, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia, our research findings reveal CEO narcissism has positive influence on ambidexterity. In contrast to our hypotheses, our findings fail to establish a significant correlation between CEO Machiavellianism and ambidexterity, as well as CEO psychopathy and ambidexterity. The findings of this research hold important implications for our understanding of how CEOs' personality traits influence ambidexterity within SMEs.

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)0.006
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicPersonality Traits and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207