MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4303197754 · doi:10.1108/jmd-11-2021-0298

Gatekeepers influencing careers of Canadian public sector employees: views from managers and union employees

2022· article· en· W4303197754 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Sean Darling, John Cunningham

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Management Development · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueGender Diversity and Inequality
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Victoria
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPublic relationsPromotion (chess)Public sectorCareer developmentHuman resource managementIncentiveGovernment (linguistics)Human capitalTraining and developmentHierarchyBusinessMarketingPolitical sciencePoliticsPsychologyManagementEconomicsSocial psychologyEconomic growth

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop a better understanding of the types of career models that different managerial and union employees view influencing their career development. Design/methodology/approach In this study, the authors gathered interview data from 74 public sector employees in management and union positions illustrating examples of the career models they experienced. Findings The study explains how unique career models are often defined by gatekeepers who act in setting out the procedures, incentives, and norms for the careers of others. The results, based on interviews in a Canadian government organization, suggest that employees perceive that different gate keepers are central in shaping careers of management and union employees in a more traditional career hierarchy, even though other perspectives or orientations of career progression exist in encouraging people to take more responsibility for career development. Management participants were more likely to be guided by upper level managers who acted as gatekeepers within a ‘perception of organizational politics’ model where “the system has a procedural merit rather than real merit….and systemic biases are not even realized by the people doing the hiring.” Key gatekeepers for union employees were those in human resource departments and the union who defined the fairness of the procedures within a human capital model which generally managed career development as a reward for higher levels of experience, education, and training. The findings illustrate unique ways that each set of gatekeepers shape the way that selection and promotion processes are carried out. Research limitations/implications The authors are mindful that our results are, at best, exploratory. The qualitative interviews were from a sample of 74 government workers in the Canadian public service and should be verified with further research. Although the authors felt that interviews illustrated saturation and might only be a reliable reflection of a specific sample, other research should examine these findings in other contexts. Further examination of these findings might help us understand the challenges of developing systems and procedures which illustrate a distributive rather than merely a procedural fairness. Practical implications The process of socialization for a career in management and union positions is demonstrated by the boundaries through which a person moves from being an outsider to an insider to the organization. Unique career models are often defined by gatekeepers who act in setting out the procedures, incentives, and norms for the careers of others. The research and practical implications point to: (i) designing supplemental behavioral interview questions and tools in selection and promotion as a way to respond to systemic biases, (ii) building awareness of how to respond to biases of the powerful role of referrals and networks in shaping careers of managerial employees, and (iii) taking steps to develop a climate which might be supportive of merit processes. Social implications The process of socialization for a career in management and union positions is demonstrated by the boundaries through which a person moves from being an outsider to an insider to the organization. Unique career models are often defined by gatekeepers who act in setting out the procedures, incentives, and norms for the careers of others. Originality/value The study suggests that unique career models are often defined by gatekeepers who act in setting out the procedures, incentives, and norms for the careers of others.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,070
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,253

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,007
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0200,006
Communication savante0,0040,001
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,112
Tête enseignante GPT0,262
Écart entre enseignants0,150 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations7
Publié2022
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Management DevelopmentMême sujetGender Diversity and InequalityTravaux en français237 207