National culture and UN global compact affiliation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Despite the global nature of the UN Global Compact (UNGC), a platform for the development, implementation and disclosure of responsible and sustainable corporate policies and practices, the participation of organisations is unequally distributed across societies. This paper aims to explore the relationship between national cultures, as defined by Hofstede, and organisations voluntarily affiliating with the UNGC. Design/methodology/approach This study tests the relationship between national culture and firm affiliation with the UNGC using data derived from Hofstede’s works and information available on the UNGC website and other websites and accounting databases, covering 282 firms in 30 countries on 4 continents. Findings The results indicate that firms in countries with high individualism or high masculinity rankings are more likely to affiliate with the UNGC. In addition, organisations in countries with less uncertainty avoidance, short-term orientation and high restraint are also more likely to affiliate with the UNGC. Originality/value The results are interesting for initiatives like the UNGC. The development strategies and democratisation tools developed by this initiative will have to take into account the specific cultural features of different countries.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".