Character in leadership: Perceptions from intercollegiate athletics administrators
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the importance of leadership in sport organizations and the extensive research conducted in leadership, the construct of leader character has received less research attention. This study examined the prevalence, perceived importance, and perceived value of leader character within Canadian intercollegiate athletics administration. A total of 116 Athletic Administrators at every Canadian U-Sports member institution were contacted to participate in the study. Seventy-six administrators agreed to participate yielding a response rate of 65.5%. Leader character was measured using the Leader Character Insight Assessment (LCIA) consisting of 11 leader character dimensions. Overall, Accountability, Integrity, and Drive were the highest ranked leader character dimensions while the lowest ranked leader character dimensions included Humility, Justice, Temperance, and Transcendence. The participants also perceived that their universities valued leader character similarly to themselves. The understanding of leader character within Canadian intercollegiate athletics administration is advanced and the importance of leader character is discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 it