MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2252958594 · doi:10.1177/1059601115592982

CEO Intellectual Stimulation and Employee Work Meaningfulness

2015· article· en· W2252958594 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

VenueGroup & Organization Management · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensemakingDynamismWork (physics)PerceptionPsychologyBusinessMeaning (existential)Public relationsSocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the influence of CEOs’ intellectually stimulating behavior, namely, encouraging followers to bring up new perspectives and innovative approaches at work, on employees’ perceptions of the meaningfulness of their work. Drawing from a collective sensemaking lens, we predicted that such CEO behavior would have a greater impact on experienced meaningfulness of work in contexts in which inputs to attributing meaning are less certain and clear-cut. Specifically, we examined the moderating roles of firm performance and industry dynamism. We surveyed the CEOs and employees from 43 firms in innovation-driven industries. Our results show lower firm performance or rapid and unpredictable changes in the industry are associated with a stronger positive relationship between CEO intellectual stimulation and employee work meaningfulness. We discuss the implications of our findings for organizational leadership practices.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.197 · 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