MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400416000 · doi:10.1108/sbr-09-2023-0285

The impact of flexible work arrangements on an older grieving population

2024· article· en· W4400416000 on OpenAlexaff
Marlee Eden Mercer

Bibliographic record

VenueSociety and Business Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceOriginalityAging in the American workforceWork (physics)Population ageingValue (mathematics)Human resource managementPerspective (graphical)Process (computing)Conceptual frameworkConceptual modelResource (disambiguation)PopulationBusinessPublic relationsKnowledge managementPsychologySociologySocial psychologyComputer sciencePolitical scienceEngineeringEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Age-inclusive management practices are crucial for addressing the needs of the older workforce, but there is limited research on these practices. One underexplored area is how workplaces can support older employees dealing with the loss of a loved one. The psychological process of loss differs for older employees and can have adverse effects on their ability to perform in the workplace. The purpose of this paper is to explore how workplaces can provide the necessary tools to support their older grieving employees. Design/methodology/approach This conceptual paper draws on the job-demand resource model and signaling theory to investigate how flexible work arrangements can support older employees after a bereavement and contribute to optimal employee performance. Findings Flexible work arrangements are theorized to lead to optimal performance via informational support. An ethical climate and stronger cultural competencies are proposed to strengthen this relationship. A theoretical framework is presented for a comprehensive research approach. Originality/value This paper advances the current understanding of age-inclusive management and offers a novel perspective on the benefits of flexible working arrangements.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociety and Business ReviewSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207