Transformational leadership: an examination of cross‐national differences and similarities
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Success in the global marketplace depends on a manager’s ability to provide leadership. Exceptional success depends on sustaining extraordinary performance. Are there universal behaviours which are consistent around the world? Are there subtle differences of emphasis which vary across different nationalities or corporate environments? Senior executives were polled in two major divisions of a global petroleum company and from its major subsidiaries around the world. They were asked to describe examples of exceptional organizational performance and to identify the key leadership behaviours which they saw as explaining or accounting for the extraordinary outcomes. Content analysis led to a few key leadership behaviours being identified. The major finding was that the main dimensions of leadership for extraordinary performance are universal. Only a few variations in emphasis existed among six different regions of the world. Also there were some clear leadership differences, long established in the folklore of the company, associated with different corporate cultures in the two major divisions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it