MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159197582 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2012.03.017

Political power, control and organizational conflict

2012· article· en· W2159197582 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maryam Eslampanah, Saeid Esmaeili, Mahdi Hosseinpour

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict Management and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsPower (physics)Control (management)Political scienceComputer scienceSocial psychologyPsychologyBusinessArtificial intelligencePhysicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There used to be an assumption that any conflict has negative and destructive influences and we must remove it from the system. However, recent studies indicate that conflict is the result of interaction with different people having various personalities, social and cultural behaviors and this is an unavoidable issue. The existence of conflict is not necessarily a bad thing; in fact, there are many evidences, which show that organizations with no conflict may fail. In other words, people who work for business units with no conflict are most likely so disparate that they cannot fit themselves to environmental conditions. In this paper, we discuss how to handle a conflict in any organization and lead the business units to organizations that are more productive.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicConflict Management and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207