MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403137745 · doi:10.1111/irj.12448

The sectoral consequences of private equity acquisitions: Spillovers in wages and employment

2024· article· en· W4403137745 on OpenAlexaff
Konstantinos Eleftheriou, Geoffrey Wood, Marilou Ioakimidis, Iliya Komarev, Dimitrios D. Thomakos

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial Relations Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPrivate Equity and Venture Capital
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetitor analysisWageEquity (law)Labour economicsBusinessPrivate sectorIndustrial relationsEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Existing Industrial Relations (IR) research suggests that Private Equity (PE) takeovers may have profound effects on the target firm's industrial relations policies and practices, most notably in terms of security of tenure and relative proclivity to engage in redundancies. This study supplements the literature by exploring the effects of PE takeovers on other firms in the same industry. We find that PE takeovers increase the sensitivity of target firms to wage costs; when there is an upward pressure on wages, they respond by shedding jobs to a greater extent than their non‐acquired same‐sector competitors. However, workers in non‐acquired firms were less likely to move to a firm that had been acquired by PE, even if pay was more than sectoral rates. Even if there is a strong emphasis on restraining wage costs in the target firm, PE takeovers do not necessarily lead to the degradation of employment practices elsewhere in the sector; rather, they may provide competitors opportunities to entice talented and skilled employees from the target firm.

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)0.005
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 venueIndustrial Relations JournalSame topicPrivate Equity and Venture CapitalFrench-language works237,207