MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968352696 · doi:10.17722/ijme.v13i2.1098

Managing a culturally diverse workforce: A managerial accountant perspective

2019· article· en· W2968352696 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jacques Hugo, Roelof Sauerman, Hannorite Schutte, Danie Schutte, Eben Van Eeden

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Management Excellence · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetitive advantageWorkforceBusinessDiversity (politics)Function (biology)Perspective (graphical)Work (physics)Strategic managementPublic relationsMarketingKnowledge managementSociologyEconomicsPolitical scienceEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of the Management Accountant has seen a dramatic shift in the past century as the primary function has gradually moved from a technical to a strategic role that focuses on creating a competitive advantage for the organization. This shift from “measuring” to “managing” demands that the management accountant possess a broader range of skills, specifically softer skills, that is needed for managing and leading the people of the organisation in their roles. However, the 21st century work place is much more culturally diverse in its workforce today, than it was in previous decades. This diversity of the people in the organization has the potential to create unequalled competitive advantage if managed well, or to it has the potential to sink an organization if not managed well. This study aims at exploring different models that can be used by the management accountant to be better at understanding and ultimately managing the people within the company in a way that brings the best out of the diversity of its people in working to create a sustainable competitive advantage.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.018
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Management ExcellenceSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207