MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074445120 · doi:10.1177/1742715010368761

Leading aesthetically in uncertain times

2010· article· en· W2074445120 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ralph Bathurst, Brad Jackson, Matt Statler

Bibliographic record

VenueLeadership · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of AucklandVictoria UniversityUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsReflexivityRelevance (law)MythologySociologyPerceptionEpistemologyHurricane katrinaAestheticsEnvironmental ethicsPolitical scienceHistorySocial scienceLawPhilosophyNatural disaster

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

‘Leading Aesthetically’ highlights the processes by which leaders can inspire and motivate using sense perceptions that go beyond rational, objective, communication. In this article, we contribute to the theoretical development of aesthetic leadership by drawing on phenomenologist Roman Ingarden’s notions of presencing and concretization; backward reflexivity; attention to both form and content; and myth-making. We illustrate the particular relevance of these theoretical concepts to leadership in conditions of uncertainty and crisis by discussing the case of Hurricane Katrina’s impacts on New Orleans in 2005. The article concludes that aesthetically-aware leaders are able to deploy a range of intellectual and emotional skills that can complement more conventional rational-instrumental decision-making approaches in ways that can have considerable benefits in times of uncertainty, and most especially in crisis situations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.024
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
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

Citations50
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeadershipSame topicManagement and Organizational StudiesFrench-language works237,207