MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224232630 · doi:10.1177/0095327x221078331

“Leaning In” or “Taking a Knee”: Career Trajectories of Senior Leaders in the Canadian Armed Forces

2022· article· en· W4224232630 on OpenAlex
Julie Coulthard, Justin M. Wright

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueArmed Forces & Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsDepartment of National Defence
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOfficerContext (archaeology)Qualitative researchExploratory researchPsychologyAgency (philosophy)ManagementSociologySocial psychologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceSocial scienceLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Less research has examined the extent to which external contexts and factors that influence an organizational member’s life choices also influence their career trajectories within the military, and particularly among those who advance to leadership positions at the General Officer/Flag Officer level. Interviews were conducted with 20 select General Officer/Flag Officers in the Canadian Armed Forces. As part of a secondary analysis of an exploratory qualitative study, we applied a Life Course Theory lens to better understand the intersections between the sociohistorical and cultural context of senior leader development, and the individual choices that the participants made that led to their ascent to their rank. This study provides insight into how the historical time and place, the timing in their lives, the linked lives they share with family, and the degree of agency they maintained over their life choices led participants to “lean in” rather than “take a knee.”

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.167 · 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