MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2299899036 · doi:10.1108/cdi-08-2015-0115

Development idiosyncratic deals and career success

2016· article· en· W2299899036 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

VenueCareer Development International · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCareer developmentSalaryPsychologyOriginalityAntecedent (behavioral psychology)Perspective (graphical)Value (mathematics)Test (biology)Sample (material)Social psychologyManagementApplied psychologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to rely on the sponsored-mobility perspective of career success (Turner, 1960) to explore the antecedents and consequences of development idiosyncratic deals (i-deals). The authors position career planning as an antecedent of development i-deals, and subjective and objective measures of career success as an outcome. Design/methodology/approach – The authors led a two-wave study among a sample of 325 engineers to test the research hypotheses. Findings – Results support the hypotheses. Development i-deals are positively related to three objective measures of career success (e.g. promotions, hierarchical level, and salary) and one subjective measure of career success (e.g. career satisfaction). Practical implications – The results offer new perspectives to practitioners who want to better manage the careers of their talented employees by highlighting the positive effects of development i-deals on career success. Originality/value – This paper relates i-deals to the field of careers.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.269 · 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