Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to understand how global managers from the generation born 1965 to 1980 (“Generation X”) manage demands of international business travel with desires for family involvement. A portrait evolves of how travel within a global career might be optimized for both business and family life. Design/methodology/approach – A qualitative methodology was used as little research has focussed on alternative forms of global work or work-family issues in a global context. The author conducted in-depth interviews with 25 Gen X global managers in dual-career families (“Global Gen Xers”) pursuing global careers from the USA and Canada. Findings – The author uncovered how Global Gen Xers experienced “work-life balance” through executing personal discretion over travel and substituting in technology. The construct of travel discretion reveals these approaches. Mutual flexibility on the part of global managers and organizations tamed the demanding nature of work spanning divergent locations and time zones. Research limitations/implications – The findings represent experiences from a self-select group of global Gen X managers interviewed at one point in their careers. The author did not obtain reflections from their families on work-family functioning. Practical implications – The findings encourage companies to foster flexibility among their global managers around travel decisions. The author can consider how and when international travel can be replaced through technology in order to control costs and sustain global workforces. Originality/value – This study provides one of the first examinations of work-life balance among younger global managers. It also highlights experiences of those not on expatriate assignments, but performing global work through international travel and technology.
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 | 0.023 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".