MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408962736 · doi:10.1177/00076503251324569

Teaching a Systems Approach to Address the Sustainability Management Disconnect

2025· article· en· W4408962736 on OpenAlexaff
Steve Kennedy, Sylvia Grewatsch, Lara Bartocci Liboni, Luciana Oranges Cezarino

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness & Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityBusinessProcess managementEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human pressure continues to deteriorate social-ecological systems at alarming rates, risking destabilization and collapse. This provokes questions on the efficacy of corporate approaches to sustainability management and how business schools are preparing managers. A systems approach to sustainability management is gaining attention for its potential to resolve the disconnect between corporate sustainability practices and social-ecological system needs. Business school education can play an important role in fostering its adoption, yet educators may lack experience with teaching a systems approach and how to effectively integrate it within courses. We contribute to sustainability management and business education by offering a learning framework with a systems perspective. This framework consists of five conceptual moves leveraging systems thinking concepts that establish a strong theoretical foundation for learning. We further illustrate these moves through practical teaching examples and provide recommendations for the integration of a systems approach into sustainability management education.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness & SocietySame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207