MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239815974 · doi:10.1108/ict-02-2015-0015

The effects of old-age stereotypes on organizational productivity (part one)

2016· article· en· W4239815974 on OpenAlexaff
Steven H. Appelbaum, Richard Wenger, Carolina Pachon Buitrago, Ravneet Kaur

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial and Commercial Training · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityPsychologyPopulationAffect (linguistics)Order (exchange)Organizational learningSocial psychologyDemographic economicsBusinessSociologyEconomicsManagementDemographyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine common stereotypes regarding old-age workers and the effect of these stereotypes on organizational productivity, as well as to suggest practical solutions for accommodating old-age workers and increasing productivity in all employees. Design/methodology/approach – This three part paper will present a thorough review of relevant literature (1991-2014, with the exception of two studies from 1976) that were conducted on the topics of old-age stereotyping, the effect of old-age stereotyping on organizational productivity, and methods for adequately motivating and managing old-age workers. Studies concerning psychology theories are also examined in order to provide a framework for practical solutions, as well as demographic statistics on population age and employment trends. Findings – This paper identifies a number of old-age stereotypes that have decreased organizational productivity in empirical studies, including reluctance to change, decreased learning ability, intelligence and memory, poor health and accidents, higher organizational costs, decreased motivation, and low innovation and productivity. Findings also suggest that old-age workers can positively affect productivity, and that low productivity is often a result of stereotyping. Research limitations/implications – The prevalence of old-age stereotyping and its impact on organizational productivity may differ by culture, industry, type of employment, education level, and other factors, and thus further research may be necessary. The literature reviewed may not adequately represent worldwide organizational trends, as the literature is largely comprised of studies performed in North America and Europe. Practical implications – Solutions based on these findings are taken directly from the literature or derived from literature on psychology theories, which include self-determination theory, socio-emotional selectivity theory, and selective optimization and compensation theory. The practical solutions proposed address work environment, motivation, rewards, flexibility, and the loss and gain of resources in old-age workers. Social implications – The proportion of old-age workers is increasing and it is therefore necessary to determine ways to adequately integrate old-age workers in the workforce. Furthermore, this can raise productivity in all employees. Originality/value – This paper demonstrates that old-age stereotyping is both prevalent and detrimental within an organizational context. These findings and solutions can potentially be used by organizations in order to increase individual and overall productivity.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.367
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.012 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial and Commercial TrainingSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207