MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996206656 · doi:10.1108/10878571111114419

Henry Mintzberg: still the zealous skeptic and scold

2011· article· en· W1996206656 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert J. Allio

Bibliographic record

VenueStrategy and Leadership · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValue (mathematics)ManagementPublic relationsOriginalityVariety (cybernetics)Shareholder valueSociologyPolitical scienceShareholderCorporate governanceEconomicsQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present an interview between Strategy & Leadership with the veteran observer and outspoken critic of corporate follies, Henry Mintzberg, Professor of Management Studies at McGill University in Montreal, about the state of management and management education. Design/methodology/approach The questions are asked by Robert J. Allio, who has been both a senior academic and executive at Fortune 500 companies. Findings Professor Mintzberg comments on troubling trends in leadership and managing, the lack of effective management, inappropriate management education, the impossibility of teaching leadership, the process of creating strategy, the current management crisis and the dangers of shareholder value management. Practical implications As an alternative approach to leadership education, McGill University has developed the International Masters in Practicing Management ( www.impm.org ). In this program practicing managers share experiences with their peers. Originality/value Mintzberg blasts a variety of targets: “US corporations are seriously sick.”

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.093 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrategy and LeadershipSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207