MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Integrating Leadership Styles and Ethical Perspectives

2001· article· fr· W2035022665 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Edward Aronson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration · 2001
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEthics in Business and Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransactional leadershipTransformational leadershipEthical leadershipLeadership styleSituational leadership theoryHumanitiesDirectivePsychologySociologyPhilosophySocial psychologyServant leadership

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper reviews two major ethical theories and the manner in which the values they espouse are associated with the directive, transactional, and transformational leadership styles. A model of ethical leadership is proposed which relates the dimensions of these styles to the level of the leader's moral development. Transformational leadership appears to be most closely connected to deontology, while transactional leadership would seem to be related more to teleological ethics, and directive leadership to ethical egoism, a category of teleology. The paper concludes with some suggestions for future research. Résumé Cette étude passe en revue deux théories principales d'éthiques et la façon dont les valeurs qu'elles compren‐nent sont liées aux styles de leadership directif, transac‐tionnel, et transformationnel. L'auteur présente un mo‐dèle de leadership éthique dans lequel les dimensions de ces styles sont associées au niveau de développement moral du leader. Le leadership transformationnel semble être lié plus étroitement à la déontologie tandis que le leadership transactionnel serait associé plutôt à l'éthique téléologique et le leadership directif à l'égo‐ïsnie éthique, une catégorie de la téléologie. L'étude se termine par quelques suggestions de recherches ultérieures.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.474
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.026 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations315
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l AdministrationSame topicEthics in Business and EducationFrench-language works237,207