CHANGES IN THE LEADERSHIP PARADIGM IN XXI CENTURY ORGANIZATIONS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The article presents a study of changes in the paradigm of leadership in accordance with modern challenges of the business environment and new requirements for the figure of the leader. The study of the paradigm of leadership is carried out through the prism of theoretical and historical conditions of its formation. Based on this, evolutionary changes of its development in the context of six basic periods with the indication of schools, theories, concepts, works and their representatives are defined. The current state of the leadership industry is analyzed on the examples of behavior of famous leaders, managers of foreign companies. The main problematic aspects of their behavior are identified. Based on researches conducted by reputable organizations in the US, Canada, as well as taking into account the Global Labor Force Index, the problem of employee dissatisfaction with their managers, leaders at work was identified. Research has shown that this problem has two aspects of origin: the first concerns the mismatch between real-world leadership and leadership in books, articles, and trainings; the second - concerns the manager himself, his behavior and relations with employees. It also focuses on such a weak side of leadership as lying. In particular, the main reasons for the lying of leaders are identified: 1) lies help to make relations better; 2) people experience stronger positive emotions when deceive ("emotional uplift of a liar"); 3) if a lie is repeated often enough and convincingly, it can become true (the Epid effect); 4) lies have become a common pattern of behavior both in everyday life and among the leaders of organizations on all continents, so little is condemned and held accountable. It has been proven that there is a close relationship between power and lies: those in power cheat more often, and the ability to cheat effectively gives more power. To get out of this situation, business organizations are invited to form a new type of leader-manager of the 5th level, the main characteristics of which are personal modesty, professional determination, dedication and honesty.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».