Do Differences Make a Difference? Managing Diversity in Division IA Intercollegiate Athletics
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study applies a framework of diversity initiatives as a basis of exploration into top management beliefs and diversity management strategies of Division IA intercollegiate athletic organizations. This framework utilizes issues of power, demographic and relational differences, and past literature regarding specific diversity strategies to empirically assess these organizations' outlooks regarding employee diversity. Results of the study suggest that Division IA intercollegiate athletic organizations operate in cultures that value similarity. Demographic variables predicted a significant amount of variance in employees' perceptions of diversity management strategies. In addition, demographic differences (being different from one's leader) accounted for an even greater amount of variance in these perceptions. Top management's beliefs in the benefits of diversity were related to perceptions of different diversity practices. That is, high beliefs resulted in higher levels of diversity management practice. Discussion of the findings relative to current theory in sport and implications for sport managers are noted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it