MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129614495 · doi:10.1002/cjas.1297

Culture, leadership and motivation in two Commonwealth Caribbean countries: One look at the African Diaspora

2014· article· en· W2129614495 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khaleid Holder, Nicole S. Knight, Betty Jane Punnett, Reccia N. Charles

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEmployee Welfare and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiasporaCommonwealthAfrican cultureGold coastPolitical scienceSociologyGeographyGender studiesLawArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Little is known of Caribbean people's views on their culture or of their beliefs regarding leadership and motivation. This study reports the results of a Delphi Technique with people in leadership positions and focus groups. Across groups, responses were relatively consistent: ethnicity and culture are described as influenced by religion, and Christianity in particular; African roots and country of origin are important; effective leaders are charismatic, visionary, results oriented, and they motivate others, lead by example, and develop vision and goals. Leaders believe motivation comes from making a difference for others. Nonleaders believe leaders are influenced by financial rewards and self‐fulfilment; nonleaders are motivated primarily by financial rewards. The results are generally similar to Western beliefs, but some interesting differences are identified. Copyright © 2014 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations13
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l AdministrationSame topicEmployee Welfare and Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207