MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2623544340

I Got The Business Blues” : What Organizations Can Learn From Popular Music

2016· preprint· en· W2623544340 on OpenAlexaff
Bertrand Agostini, Sybille Persson, Paul Shrivastava

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsFuture Earth
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBluesPopular musicPopularityAestheticsPerspective (graphical)SociologyMusic industryPsychologyMusic educationPublic relationsManagementVisual artsArtPolitical scienceSocial psychologyEconomicsPedagogy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the link between sustainable development and art begins to shed a new light on organizational conceptions, this article considers popular music, and especially blues music. The conceptual process of the paper is to highlight the philosophical roots of Western aesthetics in order to propose a counterpoint based on popular and ordinary living sustained by popular music. By analyzing blues music as both a durable support and a natural process of everyday experience, we open a door to Chinese philosophy and psychology for HR Management based on the body-mind-spirit alignment. This perspective generates new and creative avenues for research in HR management, organizational theory, and business education. The major issue is then how to sensitize the ears of HRM so that it offers ‘vital nourishment' in the workplace at a time when the cost of the depressive state of many an employee has become a proven risk.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.014
Scholarly communication0.0130.015
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicManagement and Organizational StudiesFrench-language works237,207