MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903139350 · doi:10.5430/ijba.v9n6p69

Profit Maximization Versus Stakeholders’ View of Corporate Social Responsibility: An Experiential Exercise on Ethics and Social Responsibility for Business School Courses

2018· article· en· W2903139350 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sukumar Debnath, Sudhir Tandon, B. Brian Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Administration · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEthics in Business and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningCorporate social responsibilitySocial responsibilityProfit maximizationGRASPBusiness ethicsMaximizationProfit (economics)Public relationsSociologyBusinessEngineering ethicsPsychologyEconomicsSocial psychologyPolitical sciencePedagogyComputer scienceMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While issues related to ethics and social responsibility have gained tremendous significance in corporate and academic worlds during the recent times, these concepts are difficult to grasp and even more difficult to teach in a classroom setting. This experiential exercise serves as a vehicle for students to enhance their understanding and insights on these concepts as they critically examine, in a highly involved setting, the two opposing views of corporate social responsibilities--profit maximization only versus stakeholders’ view of social responsibility.

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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.520
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.026 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business AdministrationSame topicEthics in Business and EducationFrench-language works237,207