The Impact of the COVID-19 Crisis on Executive Succession: Results of the 2020 HR@Moore Survey of Chief HR Officers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID crisis impacted just about every aspect of how firms do business. We have explored through Zoom meetings and a survey of Chief HR Officers how the crisis has impacted a variety of components of executive succession. We find that the crisis caused many firms to develop business continuity plans separate from their ongoing and emergency succession plans. Going through this process may encourage firms to look more broadly and deeply into the people and roles in their ongoing succession processes. The crisis also revealed more positive than negative characteristics in their leaders. CHROs noted that the crisis has increased the use of virtual technologies for both initial interviews of ELT candidate, and for the entire hiring process, and the vast majority suggested that the use of technology throughout the hiring process will continue to see substantial increases after the crisis ends. Finally, the crisis required board meetings to be held virtually. While CHROs do not expect this to be predominant in the future, they did indicate that approximately one quarter of board meetings will be held virtually after the crisis has passed. We discuss the implications of these findings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".