SOUL CONFLICT IN THE WORKPLACE: EXPLORING THE EXTENSION OF THEORETICAL MODELS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses the issue of increasing disengagement and dissatisfaction among employees. We review the literature on role conflict, person-organization fit, and meaningful work, as well as work in the area of management, spirituality and religion. The concept of soul conflict at work is introduced to expand theoretical models focused on conflict in the workplace, person-organization fit, organizational commitment, and well-being. Implications for management theory and practice are discussed. It isn’t enough that we have meaningful work. What is also required is work that satisfies the soul. Thomas Moore The issue of disengagement and dissatisfaction among employees in the workplace is gaining increasing attention from organizational managers and scholars alike. Many more people today are openly acknowledging that they are inherently dissatisfied with their work and their workplace. In a survey of 86,000 employees from around the world, Towers Perrin (2006) reported workers were experiencing a deepening dissatisfaction with their work, with only 14 % of employees identifying themselves as highly engaged. This compares with recent Gallup polls reporting increasing worker disengagement and
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 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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".