Corporate social responsibility: issues for human resource development professionals
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent human resource development (HRD) scholarship has called for greater focus on social responsibility and ecological sustainability. The purpose of this article is to explore the engagement of HRD professionals in corporate social responsibility (CSR), examining one central question: how do HRD professionals perceive their roles and challenges in implementing CSR in organizations that claim CSR to be a key focus of their corporate identity and operation? Understandings of CSR vary and are widely contested, but for the purposes of this discussion, CSR is defined as treating the stakeholders of the firm ethically or in a responsible manner. Drawing from a qualitative study of HRD managers in eight large North American firms declaring explicit commitment to CSR, the evidence shows that their engagement tends to focus on employee learning and promotion, employee ownership of development, and employee safety and respect. Overall, however, HRD appeared to be only marginally involved or interested in the firms' CSR activities. The article concludes with an argument for greater engagement of HRD in CSR and offers suggestions for research and practice towards this end.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 it