MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967702909 · doi:10.69492/jbib.v21i1.495

Jesus Christ: Ethics Lessons for Project Managers

2018· article· en· W2967702909 on OpenAlexaff
Teodor Mihai

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œjournal of biblical integration in business. · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEthics in Business and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJesus christChristianitySociologyTheologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When we think of Jesus Christ, the first reflex is to associate Him with religion, which is quite normal, Jesus being the son of God and at the origin of Christianity. By cons, Jesus Christ was not a religious person. He was a great leader and teacher, very practical, very popular, very close to those who were in need. His actions and teachings are today the attributes of a modern leader. Christians (as well as non-Christians) should be the first to realize that the teachings of Jesus go beyond the sphere of religion, and that they can learn much from Him, as did the people of His time. In academic archives on project management, there is only one article that directly discusses the topic of Jesus Christ. By cons, there is no article on the topic of Jesus Christ and project management in terms of ethics. The purpose of this article is to apply to project management some ethical teachings of Jesus Christ, ethics not (yet) being part of the ten areas of knowledge in project management included in the PMBoK of the Project Management Institute (PMI).

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.420
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.084 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œjournal of biblical integration in business.Same topicEthics in Business and EducationFrench-language works237,207