MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170427832 · doi:10.1177/0021886303255959

Coping with the Sudden Loss of an Indispensable Employee

2003· article· en· W2170427832 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

VenueThe Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTacit knowledgeCoping (psychology)PsychologyProductivityBusinessSocial psychologyBusiness administrationExplicit knowledgeKnowledge managementEconomicsComputer scienceClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using real-time longitudinal survey and interview data, the authors assessed explicit and tacit knowledge flows within a small manufacturing firm for an indispensable employee (IE). They then compared those flows to the flows for a replacement employee (RE) who took over after the IE became ill. As expected, they found that (a) explicit and tacit knowledge outflows to coworkers were greater for the IE than for the RE, and (b) tacit knowledge inflows from coworkers were slightly greater for the RE than for the IE. Explicit knowledge inflows from coworkers were not consistently greater for the RE than for the IE. Surprisingly, the loss of the IE did not have a negative impact on the firm's productivity.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.242 · 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