MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045571475 · doi:10.1177/1741143213510504

A general model of organizational values in educational administration

2013· article· en· W2045571475 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

VenueEducational Management Administration & Leadership · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Strategy and Culture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonOrganization developmentOrganizational learningOrganizational studiesOrganizational behavior and human resourcesOrganizational engineeringOrganizational commitmentOrganizational effectivenessOrganizational theoryPsychologySociologyEpistemologyPublic relationsKnowledge managementSocial psychologyPolitical scienceManagementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Values theorists in educational administration agree that understanding organizational values is integral to organizational effectiveness. However, research in this area tends to be superficial, and a review of pertinent literature reveals no clear definition of organizational values or consequent implications for practical application. One of the substantive issues in current organizational values discourse is the lack of agreement around descriptors pertaining to the phenomenon; additionally, participants in the discussion frequently assume common understanding. What, then, does “organizational values” consist of conceptually, and how can it be defined? In this article the author summarizes a study conducted to clarify understanding of the organizational values phenomenon, and offers a general model of organizational values based on the results.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.552
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.206 · 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