MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086182382 · doi:10.1108/09696471011008224

Leadership in a network of communities: a phenomenographic study

2010· article· en· W2086182382 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Learning Organization · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityPhenomenographyPublic relationsGovernment (linguistics)Knowledge managementValue (mathematics)Empirical researchQualitative researchLeadership studiesSociologyPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsEngineeringSocial scienceLeadership styleEpistemologyPedagogyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Canada's Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Research and Technology Initiative (CRTI) uses an operating model that is unusual in government. It is created to enable cross‐boundary capability and capacity building and learning. Some consider it a model for other federal science initiatives. The purpose of this paper is to explore the nature of leadership – and its relationship to perceived effectiveness – in this complex network of counter‐terrorism communities, where parts of the network are functioning better than others. At a more academic level, it explores whether complexity theory can inform leadership theory. Design/methodology/approach This qualitative, empirical study uses phenomenography and elements of ethnography as methodologies. Data are gathered through interviews and observation. Findings CRTI personnel refer to their initiative as a counter‐terrorism network of communities. The leader of each community works – without positional authority – with participants from many organizations and locations. The paper reveals qualitatively different ways of understanding leadership. Even though CRTI groups have much in common, participants' ways of understanding that work vary greatly. Some understand their work environments as complex systems rather than as traditional government structures; this way of understanding is associated with perceptions of effectiveness. This finding can change the ways in which science and technology professionals make sense of their work in complex, trans‐disciplinary fields such as counter‐terrorism and global warming. Originality/value This qualitative, empirical research complements and supports some of the conceptual work about leadership and learning in complex environments.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.295
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.076 · 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