MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206408723 · doi:10.1080/20430795.2021.2017255

Managerial support and innovative work behaviour in B corps: Examining the effect of female employee work engagement and corporate reputation

2021· article· en· W4206408723 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Françoise Contreras, Karla Soria-Barreto, Sergio Zúñiga-Jara

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Finance & Investment · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Social Responsibility Reporting
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsModerationReputationWork (physics)Sample (material)Work engagementLatin AmericansPublic relationsSocial exchange theoryBusinessPsychologyBusiness administrationMarketingPolitical scienceSocial psychologySociologyEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

B Corps aim to produce a positive impact on society and the environment while developing the organizational goals through a sustainable agenda. For this purpose, B Corps need innovative employees that contribute to increase their competitiveness, making them more attractive to investors. Based on the social exchange theory, this research proposes a model of innovative work behaviour in women that work in Latin America B Corps, hypothesizing that this behaviour can be influenced by managerial support. Likewise, the mediating role of employees’ work engagement in this relationship is analysed. Besides, the moderator role of reputation was explored. The sample consisted of 242 female employees from 16 B Corps located in Latin America. The results show that managerial support has effects on innovative work behaviour, both direct and through employees’ work engagement. The organizational reputation of the B Corps has demonstrated being a valid moderator of this relationship.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable Finance & InvestmentSame topicCorporate Social Responsibility ReportingFrench-language works237,207