The Influence Of Ethical Leadership On Managerial Performance: Mediating Effects Of Mindfulness And Corporate Social Responsibility
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
In a continuing world of corporate misdeeds and unscrupulous decision making, much of the management and academic literatures points to the incomplete knowledge of the consequences of ethics leadership. One of the bastions of ethics gatekeeping in the firm is the CFO but remarkably scant information can be found on their perceptions concerning ethics leadership. This study addresses this void by examining mindfulness and corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives as new mediating linkages in comprehending the influence of ethics leadership on managerial performance. Findings reveal that ethical leadership is positively associated with CSR initiatives which, in turn, operate to enhance managerial performance. Simultaneously, ethical leadership manifests a significant positive relationship with mindfulness but, surprisingly, there is no corresponding relationship with managerial performance. Instead, mindfulness indirectly influences managerial performance through the intervening effects on CSR initiatives. These findings suggest that firms can acquire better managerial performance by focusing efforts on CSR strategies, bringing cognitive processes of mindfulness to bear on these actions, and grooming ethics leadership. In addition, the results offer researchers new relationships to model in the leadership domain.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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