MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1575427345 · doi:10.1108/13620431211255824

Comparing apples to apples

2012· article· en· W1575427345 on OpenAlexaffabout
Seán Lyons, Linda Schweitzer, Eddy S. Ng, Lisa Kuron

Bibliographic record

VenueCareer Development International · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityDalhousie UniversityCarleton UniversityUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRespondentVariance (accounting)Baby boomersSample (material)PsychologyCareer developmentGeneration xSocial psychologyDemographic economicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This study aims to compare the career patterns of Matures, Baby Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials over the various stages of their careers to determine whether there have been notable shifts away from the “traditional” career model characterized by long‐term linear, upward career movement, toward a “modern” career model characterized by increased job mobility, organizational mobility and multi‐directional career movement. Design/methodology/approach The retrospective career accounts of 105 Canadians were gathered through review of résumé information and semi‐structured interviews. The job changes and organizational changes experienced by each respondent in each five‐year career period (e.g. age 20‐24, 25‐29) and the direction of job changes (i.e. upward, downward, lateral or change of career track) were recorded. The generations were compared statistically on each of these measures through analysis of variance (ANOVA). Findings Significant inter‐generational differences were observed on all variables of interest, but the differences were largely restricted to the age 20‐24 and 30‐34 career stages. Research limitations/implications The study relied on a small sample because of the qualitative nature of the data collection. The sample was also exclusively Canadian. The results should therefore be interpreted with care and the research should be replicated with different types of respondents and in different cultural contexts. Practical implications The research demonstrates to employers that the younger generations change jobs and employers at a greater rate than previous generations and that they are more willing to accept non‐upward career moves. Recruiting and retaining young employees will therefore require a different approach than was used for previous generations. Originality/value The use of retrospective accounts allowed for the comparison of generations within various career stages. This overcomes a significant limitation of cross‐sectional studies of generational phenomena by simultaneously considering life‐cycle and generational cohort effects.

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)0.005
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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations119
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCareer Development InternationalSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207