MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036643071 · doi:10.1108/00251740210441018

Developing personal responsibility and leadership traits in all your employees: part 1 – shaping and harmonizing the high‐performance drivers

2002· article· en· W2036643071 on OpenAlexaff
Peter A.C. Smith, Meenakshi Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Decision · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Learning and Leadership
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessFocus (optics)Public relationsPerformance managementProcess managementMarketingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proposes that to optimize enterprise performance and longevity, organizations must develop and sustain appropriate traits of personal responsibility and leadership in all employees. Contends that this is feasible and describes how it can be accomplished. Part 1 of this paper deal with shaping and harmonizing the high performance drivers. Part 2, which will appear in Management Decision Vol. 40 No. 9, will deal with optimally shaping and harmonizing focus, will and capability.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.276
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.007 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations13
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement DecisionSame topicOrganizational Learning and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207