MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088059162 · doi:10.1080/09585192.2020.1819857

Greening the workplace through supervisory behaviors: assessing what really matters to employees

2020· article· en· W3088059162 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Human Resource Management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Comparative Analysis Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupervisorContext (archaeology)BusinessSustainabilityQualitative comparative analysisPsychologyPublic relationsKnowledge managementManagementPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research in environmental sustainability shows consistently that supervisory support plays a critical role in shaping the work context to create conditions that favor employee eco-friendly behaviors. We investigate the combined effect of supervisory support, trust in supervisor and commitment to the supervisor for predicting employees’ environmental behavior using data from a sample of 142 full-time employees in a fuzzy sets qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Our findings show first, that employee environmental behaviors are motivated by supervisory support, regardless of trust in supervisor or commitment to the supervisor. Our results also show that in the absence of supervisory support, employees’ environment behavior is fostered by trust in supervisor and commitment to the supervisor. This research contributes to the literature by clarifying how supervisors can encourage subordinates to behave in an eco-friendly way.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.268 · 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