A New Perspective on Systems Leadership and Its Impact on Sustainable Social and Economic Innovation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined how learning and working from an Anti-Oppressive Practice (AOP) lens supports early-career systems leaders to advance sustainable social and economic innovation. In particular, we examine the challenges and opportunities posed by such integration, and explore how the new orientation of participants towards the AOP influences their decision-making process and the possibility of developing sustainable solutions. The project utilized two qualitative data sources. The participants were able to identify methods of learning more about AOP (e.g., learning from others, identifying and utilizing key stakeholders) and acknowledging responsibility to create space for AOP as emerging business leaders. Two key findings emerged from the research participants pertaining to how AOP supported their development of systems leadership capabilities for purposes of advancing sustainable social, economic, and environmental innovation. As successive groups of future systems leaders enter the sector in Canada, this paper will assist in understanding the complexities and potential benefits of employing an AOP lens to systems leadership and systems thinking.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it