MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011773097 · doi:10.1177/0020852313501248

When subordinates feel supported by managers: investigating the relationships between support, trust, commitment and outcomes

2013· article· en· W2011773097 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pascal Paillé, François Grima, Denis Bernardeau

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Administrative Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupervisorProcrastinationSample (material)Social exchange theoryAutonomyBusinessPublic relationsWork (physics)Government (linguistics)Order (exchange)ProfessionalizationPublic sectorPsychologyMarketingSocial psychologyManagementPolitical scienceEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research was to examine the relationship between managers and their subordinates. The framework of social exchange theory was used in order to examine whether subordinates demonstrate effort at work and remain in exchange of support by their manager. Using a sample of employees ( N = 704) working for a provincial government in Canada, the results indicate that perceived supervisor support, trust in the supervisor reduce the likelihood that a public sector employee will leave their job or procrastinate at work, through commitment to their supervisor. The results are discussed in the light of public management research. Points for practitioners The ability of managers to create a healthy work environment based on the capacity to recognize the efforts of their subordinates requires the professionalization of the role by providing managers with greater autonomy to manage the resources at their disposal.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

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

Citations26
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review of Administrative SciencesSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207