MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How Plant Managers' Experiences and Attitudes Toward Sustainability Relate to Operational Performance

2009· article· en· W2119270631 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProduction and Operations Management · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability in Business
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityBusinessTriple bottom lineOperational efficiencyEnvironmental economicsProcess managementMarketingEnvironmental resource managementOperations managementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Managers are increasingly faced with pressure to think not just about profits, but also about their organization's environmental and social performance. This research provides a first examination of operational managers' experiences with and attitudes about employee well‐being and environmental issues, how these factors impact employee well‐being and environmental performance, and how the three performance measures interrelate. We use violations of Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations and Toxic Release Inventory reports of emissions as proxies for employee well‐being and environmental performance. Our findings suggest that operational managers do not (yet) think in sustainability terms. However, employee well‐being and environmental performance do interact in a significant way with operational performance. Hence, operational managers would benefit from a more complete understanding of the relationships among the elements of the triple bottom line.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.212 · 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