MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072073242 · doi:10.5539/res.v4n1p155

Introducing the Feminist Management Discourse in Organizations

2012· article· en· W2072073242 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aagoth Elise Storvik

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsSubtextNorwegianSociologyWork (physics)Public relationsPolitical scienceLinguisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article demonstrates management discourse without masculine subtexts. In two organizations in the Norwegian state administration management was talked about either as a truly gender neutral activity or as a “feminine” activity. Managers’ primary tasks were to motivate team members and help them develop their capacities, it was stated. Further, team management was described either by the use of metaphors from gardening or childcare. Management discourse without a masculine subtext still appears to be very uncommon in work organizations. Why the typical masculine gendering of management was swapped with a more neutral or even feminine gendering is discussed in the article. It is argued that the successful launching of a non-masculine discourse relied on feminist agents who very effectively created organizational structures supporting such a discourse.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.687
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicGender Diversity and InequalityFrench-language works237,207