HONOURABLE MENTION: Warden & Odlum: Positional Vs. Personal Leadership Power in the Officers of the Canadian Expeditionary Force, 1914-1918
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The professional development of the Canadian Expeditionary Force during the First World War is an aspect not often covered in the popular imagination of the conflict, or their contributions to Canadian successes in locations such as Vimy Ridge or the 100 Days Offensive. The conflict between personal and positional power is by no means not a new phenomena. However, it is a conflict that was vital to the development of the Canadian military's professionalism, as well as the ensuing legacies that it inspired. This can be exemplified by the professional relationship between Brigadier General Victor Wentworth Odlum and Lt. Colonel John Weightman Warden, who served one another between 1914-1918 first in the 1st Division, then more intimately within the 11th Brigade, 4th Division. Throughout this paper, the relationship between these two men and the conflicts they experienced together highlights this change at the battalion and brigade level within the divisional hierarchy of the CEF. Their relationship demonstrated how the conflict between personal and positional hierarchy was a fluid one that applied to all officers of the CEF and applied to the organization at not just at the divisional, but at the brigade and battalion levels as well. Overall, this was a fundamental step in the development of professionalism in Canada’s military history with its legacy being that the lessons of leadership theory of the First World War are still being taught, more than a century later, in the military today.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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".