MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019020066 · doi:10.1504/ijlic.2008.020154

Collective leadership and social logics: a new strategic change management challenge

2008· article· en· W2019020066 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Leadership and Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalHEC MontréalUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationChange management (ITSM)Strategic leadershipKnowledge managementProcess (computing)Social changeResistance (ecology)Public relationsBusinessSociologyTransactional leadershipPolitical scienceComputer scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper argues the importance of engaging a political negotiation process to design and deliver strategic change. This intervention research shows that enabling a political negotiation process generates and empowers a new form of leadership to drive change: the collective leadership. A new form of strategic change management method was designed and implemented to empower these tacit social logics to generate change. The hermeneutic dynamic of social logic revealed a predisposition for change at the operational level and a change resistance at the managerial level. The collective leadership is generated from the social logics of transformation and innovation within the social structure. In this business case, the collective leadership enables organisational change and innovation and becomes a new strategic change management challenge.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.140 · 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