MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591393393 · doi:10.1108/ijpl-12-2016-0053

Leadership, “communityship,” and “the good folk”

2017· article· en· W2591393393 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

VenueInternational Journal of Public Leadership · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Learning and Leadership
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityIndividualismValue (mathematics)Public relationsSociologyField (mathematics)Action (physics)Political scienceQualitative researchManagementEngineering ethicsSocial scienceEngineeringComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify critical challenges to public leaders in troubled times, based on the experience and thoughts of an accomplished and world-renowned academic in the field of strategy and leadership. The authors have also included it on the original paper, which is attached. Design/methodology/approach A semi-structured interview was conducted based on a series of questions that are considered pertinent to the challenges facing public leaders. Findings The key findings suggest that individualism and egos are too dominant, that there is an absence of effective ethical leadership which, together, overshadows the need for community action. Originality/value This summary of the short interview provides a unique insight into the challenges facing public leadership.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.107 · 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