MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1889362871 · doi:10.1504/ijicbm.2015.071304

Mentoring social entrepreneurs in India: attributes and functions

2015· article· en· W1889362871 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sujatha Raman, C. Vijayalakshmi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMentoring and Academic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsExtant taxonEmpathyTransparency (behavior)Public relationsSPARK (programming language)PsychologyBusinessProcess (computing)EntrepreneurshipMarketingPolitical scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper identifies factors that contribute to an effective mentoring relationship. It focuses on social entrepreneurs in India - a growing segment populated by small enterprises but considered vital for addressing the development needs of the poor. Extant literature in the area of mentoring is predominated by works on employee mentoring and scant attention has been paid to mentoring entrepreneurs and in particular social entrepreneurs. This research addresses this gap by exploring the attributes of the mentor and entrepreneur that contributes to effective mentoring and identifies certain critical functions of mentoring. The conclusions from this study indicate that experience and empathy, intensity and interest, transparency, development of individual and social spark are the attributes that are required for an effective mentoring relationship. In addition the mentor also needs to perform the following functions for successful mentoring; creation of appropriate climate for mentoring, inculcation of structured thinking process, leveraging on differences of views, encouraging multiplicity of mentors and mentoring and reiteration of enterprise objectives.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Indian Culture and Business ManagementSame topicMentoring and Academic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207