MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Creating Shared Value Through Meta-Organizational Common Good Human Resource Management

2024· article· en· W4400442867 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Strobel, Kelsey M. Taylor, Lydia Bals, Eugenia Rosca

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCooperative Studies and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge managementValue (mathematics)Human resource managementBusinessOrganizational behavior and human resourcesProcess managementComputer scienceOrganizational learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on the role of Human Resource Management (HRM) in fostering sustainability has pointed to the difficulty of changing organizations that have been built and optimized for economic profit. An emerging stream of research on sustainable businesses therefore focuses on organizations that are designed for sustainability from inception. Based on qualitative data, this empirical study investigates the design and functionality of HRM systems in companies that have received awards for their high level of environmental sustainability. Moreover, it examines how these systems contribute to the creation of shared value for the common good. Integrating existing insights from common good HRM and meta-organizational HRM, we elaborate theory of shared HR value creation by firms with exceptional environmental performance. We identify five principles through which common good HR practices are implemented and related outcomes of the HRM system. Our elaborated framework highlights relevant inputs, practices and outputs required for common good HRM and meta-organizational characteristics enabling the shared value creation of the HRM system. Our research has implications for designing strategically targeted HRM systems for environmental sustainability.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.229 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicCooperative Studies and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207