MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021390990 · doi:10.1108/09696471111096019

The shift needed for sustainability

2011· article· en· W2021390990 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

VenueThe Learning Organization · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSustainable Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityTriple bottom lineSustainability scienceSustainability organizationsAction (physics)Process managementAction researchManagement scienceKnowledge managementBusinessEngineering ethicsComputer scienceEngineeringManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this action research is to begin to assess to what extent organizations have in practice begun to make the shift towards triple bottom line (TBL) sustainability. Design/methodology/approach A definition of TBL sustainability is provided, and key elements of TBL sustainability considered necessary to success are identified based on current literature and public commentary. An assessment is made via published surveys and an action research study of how these components are being addressed now and for the future. The action research study involved the design and launching of a Zoomerang survey that was posted both in the USA and on international websites and blogs. Findings The synthesis from the research reveals a lack of a clear definition of sustainability which sets in motion a whole systemic dynamic. The data from the action research exemplify this dynamic. First, there is a pattern of adopting a short‐term focus and expediency in decision making. Second, problem solving favors the “quick fix” over thoughtful consideration and development of the key components for sustainability. The research may also lead to questioning the urgency of implementing the very complex systemic TBL sustainability at this time in view of widespread climate concerns, versus concentrating on the more straightforward carbon footprint reduction. Research limitations/implications A major implication is the pressing need to clearly define sustainability and its organizational implications. Organizations must then make the shift from a short‐term perspective to more of a long‐term perspective, such that the clearly defined sustainability concerns will be addressed. Research conclusions are based on limited published data and a single survey; further research is required to substantiate the conclusions. Practical implications Sustainability is making some inroads in organizations but far too many organizations are only “going through the motions” with predictable results for overall need for improvement. A cohesive, clear linkage among the defining characteristics of sustainability, and guidelines for implementation, are proposed in this paper. Originality/value This action research presents data on how sustainability is actually viewed and implemented in organizations, and suggests from a systemic point of view which critical components of sustainability are yet to be seriously addressed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.196 · 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