MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410512042 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v27i3.7647

CEO Extraversion and Firm’s Entrepreneurial Orientation: The Role of CEO’s Bridging Social Capital and Top Management Team Support

2025· article· en· W4410512042 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zahidul Karim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)BusinessEntrepreneurial orientationExtraversion and introversionBusiness administrationSocial capitalManagementPsychologySocial psychologyEntrepreneurshipPersonalitySociologyEconomicsFinanceBig Five personality traits

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CEO personality and its impact on entrepreneurial orientation (EO) is a sparking topic for scholars and practitioners. The influence of CEO extraverted personality on EO extensively studied but the mechanisms by which extraverted CEO influence the entrepreneurial orientation of firms are not adequately studied. Integrating Upper Echelon and Social Capital theories, this study has established a theoretical link between CEO extraversion and firm’s EO and underlying mechanisms with two contingent factors. The study proposes that the CEO’ s bridging social capital and top management team (TMT) support strengthen this relationship. Through rigorous literature review, the present study provides an important resolution for mixed findings in prior studies and important managerial insights for understanding the role of CEO extraversion on EO and the contingent effects of TMT support and CEO’s bridging social capital. Finally, the study offers future research options.

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)0.009
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207