MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071415089 · doi:10.1108/02610151111135750

An assessment of employment equity and Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment developments in South Africa

2011· article· en· W2071415089 on OpenAlexaff
Frank M. Horwitz, Harish C. Jain

Bibliographic record

VenueEquality Diversity and Inclusion An International Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersBritish AcademyNuffield Foundation
KeywordsEmpowermentDisadvantagedOriginalityEquity (law)Transformational leadershipPolitical sciencePoliticsPaceContext (archaeology)Public policyPublic relationsQualitative researchEconomic growthSociologyEconomicsSocial scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide an assessment of employment equity, Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) and associated human resource management policies in South Africa. Polices and practices, and progress in representation of formerly disadvantaged groups are evaluated. Design/methodology/approach The paper comprises a general review using descriptive primary and secondary data and qualitative organizational factors. Findings The pace of representation and diversity at organisational levels is incremental rather than transformational.Conclusions for policy makers and organizational leaders are drawn, taking into consideration socio‐historical, political and demographic context of this jurisdiction. Originality/value The paper's findings and conclusions are pertinent for public and organizational policy and practice.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.397
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

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 designObservational
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

Citations68
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEquality Diversity and Inclusion An International JournalSame topicGender Diversity and InequalityFrench-language works237,207