MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388273340 · doi:10.23865/magma.v20.1031

Transcenderende ledelse

2017· article· no· W4388273340 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tellef Raabe, Ida Kopperstad

Bibliographic record

VenueMagma · 2017
Typearticle
Languageno
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En fersk SINTEF-rapport slår fast at endringshastigheten i Norge øker. Norske bedrifter er derfor i økende grad avhengig av rask omstillingsevne, noe som fordrer en rekke komplekse lederegenskaper. I litteraturen beskrives hundrevis av teorier for vellykket lederskap, men flere forskere har påpekt at det er behov for et mer helhetlig teoretisk rammeverk. Transcenderende ledelse er et slikt holistisk rammeverk, som i en ny pilotundersøkelse av den norske mediebransjen synes å være et velegnet verktøy for å undersøke og presentere vellykket og ønskverdig lederatferd. Rammeverket belyser lederatferd langs tre dimensjoner: ledelse av andre, ledelse av organisasjonen og ledelse av seg selv. Ramme­verket inkluderer dermed tre ledende teorier for lederskap: transformasjonsledelse, strategisk ledelse og autentisk ledelse, som samlet gir en god og konsis oversikt over hvilke nøkkelegenskaper ledere bør etterstrebe å inneha. Transcenderende ledere assosieres med bedre økonomiske resultater, bedre trivsel, et sterk­ere samfunnsansvar og større innovasjonskraft. Rammeverket er utviklet av Mary Crossan og kolleger ved Ivey Business School i Toronto, og har ikke tidligere vært beskrevet på norsk.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1080.034

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagmaSame topicManagement and Organizational StudiesFrench-language works237,207