Employment Relations as Drivers of Social Mission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nonprofit organizations are defined by their social mission. Thus, individual employees often perceive their relationship with the organization in terms of the social mission and values that attract them to each nonprofit. The perception, processes, dimensions and outcomes of the nexus between employees and the social mission are played out mainly through employment relations. Research suggests that employment relations in nonprofit organizations are not only uniquely contextual due in part to the social mission of the organization, the relationship is particularly multidimensional combining elements of social exchange, social movement, strategy and high performance. The nexus between employment relations and social mission is also likely to be constantly evolving in order to align with change in the environment. This symposium provides a forum for leading scholars to contribute to our understanding of the relationship between employment relations and social mission by 1) exploring relevant factors to consider in the formulation of employment relations to enhance the social mission of nonprofit organizations; 2) examining how social mission interactions with employment relations impact individual employee outcomes such as engagement and meaningfulness; 3) analyze how the combination of social justice and employment relations factors drive synergies and inter-organizational relationships that benefits the society, the organization, and the employees and 4) the role of nonprofit leadership is developing systems that support the social mission. A Decade Later and How Much Wiser? A Systematic Review of Strategic HRM Research in NPOs Presenter: Alina McCandless Baluch; U. of St Andrews Presenter: Hans-Gerd Ridder; Leibniz U. Hannover Employee Engagement and Perception of HR Practices: What You See is What You Get Presenter: Kunle Akingbola; Lakehead U. Presenter: Sephora Kerekou; Laval U. Presenter: Aurelas Tohon; Laval U. Social Unionism as a Contribution to Human Capital Priorities Presenter: Carol Brunt; U. of Wisconsin, Whitewater Presenter: Kunle Akingbola; Lakehead U. High Performance Work Systems in Nonprofit Organizations: The Role of the Executive Director Presenter: Jessica Elizabeth Sowa; U. of Baltimore
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".