Technology Management: A Cross-Disciplinary Master-Program with a Focus on Leadership
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
<p class="SectionTitle">Leadership is important. Management is important. There are good reasons to conceptually and pedagogically separate the two in order to see some fundamental differences. In a cross disciplinary master program named Technology Management at Lund University, Sweden, the students are given opportunities to study and learn management, and however, what makes the program unique is its profound focus on leadership. The Technology Management program includes six courses, Teamwork and Leadership being one of them. In this course, theories and knowledge in leadership is learnt and discussed, this is then intertwined into the other courses in which it is practiced, and finally the outcome is brought back to the Teamwork and Leadership course for further discussions. In addition to this the students are writing daily reflections in a so called Learning Journal, over a one-year period, making it possible for the students to reflect over and thereby shape their own leadership style and mindset. Course evaluations and placement reports indicates that the students learning about theories, practice and mindset related to leadership is ranked as the most valuable learning from their entire educational curricula/period.</p>
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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