The Relationship between Female Representation at Strategic Level and Firm's Competitiveness: Evidences from Cargo Logistic Firms of Pakistan and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The comparative study investigates the impact of various attributes such as feminine leadership style, gender diversity, and autonomy linked with the female representation at strategic level on the performance and competitiveness of the Cargo Logistic Firms in the contrasting economies; Pakistan and Canada. Previous studies offered limited insight due to unidimensional while this study takes multivariate approach, considering; variable of interest examined in terms of economies and gender. Cross-sectional research design following semi-structured questionnaire circulated among targeted audience by combining of stratified (probability) and convenience, purposive, and snowball (non-probability) sampling technique at layers of management. The combined sample size is 631 employees. The results showed that females prefer more flexible leadership style in comparison to males. Organisations having high gender diversity and female representation at strategic level are more progressive and innovative. Interestingly, in developing economies, rapid career growth chances are higher for females. Females are more people oriented while male are more task-oriented. Males have high desire for autonomy at workplace.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".