MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043445101 · doi:10.5465/amr.2010.0544

Reflections on The 2009<i>AMR</i>Decade Award: Do We Have A Theory of Organizational Learning?

2011· article· en· W2043445101 on OpenAlexaff
Mary Crossan, Cara C. Maurer, Roderick E. White

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Learning and Leadership
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrganizational theoryOrganizational learningSociologyCitationOrganizational behaviorManagementKnowledge managementEngineering ethicsEngineeringComputer scienceEconomicsLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Having received the “Decade Award” for the most cited AMR article from the past decade, we reflect on how our framework of organizational learning (OL) has been used in subsequent research and whether a theory of OL has emerged. Our citation review revealed that although some of the subsequent research has added to the original work, the challenge to develop an accepted theory remains unrealized. We offer promising directions for developing a theory of OL.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0130.014
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0210.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations230
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ReviewSame topicOrganizational Learning and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207