MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W80582974

CIO SURVIVAL AND THE COMPOSITION OF THE TOP MANAGEMENT TEAM

2011· article· en· W80582974 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gregory S. Dawson, Robert J. Kauffman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)SurvivabilityPrivate sectorBusinessRank (graph theory)Public sectorDemographic economicsPublic relationsEconomicsPolitical scienceComputer scienceEconomic growthHistoryEconomy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore empirical regularities of CIO survivability in public and private organiza-tions using CIO job tenure durations spanning 1994 to 2009 for 1,594 executives. We employ the Kaplan-Meier estimator from event history analysis to compute survivor functions for CEOs, COOs, CFOs and CIOs. We make log rank comparisons of job tenure durations to make inferences within/across executive titles, and between public and private sector groups. The results suggest that: CIOs have shorter survival durations than CEOs and COOs, comparable to CFOs; private sector CIOs have longer durations than public sector CIOs; CIO membership in the top management team increases sur-vivability; female CIOs stay a shorter time than males; and women on the top man-agement team diminish CIO tenures overall. From an additional executive arrival and departure time proximity analysis, we find that only a quarter of CIOs are members of the top management team, but membership lengthens tenure.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association for Information SystemsSame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207