Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it