MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388272952 · doi:10.1177/21695067231192925

A new taxonomy to categorize flexible work arrangements for post-covid organizational work planning

2023· article· en· W4388272952 on OpenAlexaff
Wenbi Wang, Jimmy T. Lê

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCategorizationTaxonomy (biology)AutonomyFlexibility (engineering)Work (physics)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicKnowledge managementComputer scienceProcess managementManagement scienceData sciencePolitical scienceBusinessManagementArtificial intelligenceEngineeringEconomicsEcologyBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flexible work arrangements (FWA) widely proliferated around the world during the covid pandemic lockdown. A new multi-dimensional taxonomy was proposed in this paper to classify different forms of FWA according to the degree of autonomy that a policy offers to employees with respect to their spatial mobility, temporal flexibility, and the degree of freedom from supervision. This taxonomy reflects the defining features of contemporary flexible working. It enables researchers and business decision-makers to categorize different forms of FWA, meaningfully compare their impacts on organizational and individual performance metrics, and support an evidence-based approach to inform the establishment of post-pandemic FWA policies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0120.010
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicWork-Family Balance ChallengesFrench-language works237,207