MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296110219 · doi:10.5339/avi.2022.7

Business ethics in the era of COVID 19: How to protect jobs and employment rights through innovation

2022· article· en· W4296110219 on OpenAlexaff
Chokri Kooli, Melanie lock Son, Imene Beloufa

Bibliographic record

VenueAvicenna · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness ethicsObligationMoral obligationBusinessPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Public relationsEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pandemic situation generated by the novel coronavirus virus (COVID-19) created several moral and economic dilemmas. While trying to save many local and world economies, entrepreneurs, leaders, and policymakers faced the challenges of managing the resultant economic and financial disruptions and risks coupled with the moral obligation to observe business ethics. This research is based on a documental collection, revision, and analysis of relevant and emerging literature to catch the best practices and experiences adopted by various governments and businesses, especially in western countries, to protect the jobs and employment rights of workers. Among other things, this study urges social policymakers to adopt innovative mechanisms and programs to not only protect the rights of employees but also help maintain jobs during pandemic situations and economic crises The research suggests that adhering to business ethics will enhance the use of technology and boost the sense of innovation and creativity of both employees and their organizations. The importance of the collaboration between public Administrators, policymakers, entrepreneurs, and employees to maintain the fundamentals of business ethics and protect employees’ rights is adjudged to be critical to a speedy recovery from the losses and disruptions caused by the pandemic.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score0.837

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAvicennaSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207