MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Remote Work & _____?

2025· article· en· W4416000607 on OpenAlexaff
Ravi Shanker Gajendran, Mara Cable, Jamel Catoe, Anne Pedersen, Jen Rhymer, Kim de Laat, Siqi He, Prithwiraj Choudhury, Claudia Manca

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Organizational communicationIndustrial sociologySocial workWorking life

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the rise and sustained practice of remote work has come to transform myriad aspects of organizational life. In a world where the physical colocation of workers is no longer a taken for granted assumption, it is imperative that researchers consider how remote work intersects with traditional management theories and whether there might be opportunities to build and extend theory in ways that better reflect newer working arrangements. The researchers featured in this symposium consider how workers facilitate meaningful social connection when working remotely, how workers communicate and coordinate across remote work settings, how remote work impacts life outside of work, and how employees and managers navigate remote work transitions. The five papers and the discussion explore how organizations are evolving through the practice of remote work, and they invite future research and dialogue on how remote work arrangements will shape the future of work. Ultimately, this symposium aims to further management scholars’ understanding of how individuals in organizations can more effectively work together when they cannot physically be together. Enabling Social Connections in Location-Independent Organizations Author: Jen Rhymer; University College London Hybrid Work Arrangements and Cognitive Labour: Implications for Gender Inequality at Work and Home Author: Kim de Laat; University of Waterloo Author: Erin Marie Reid; McMaster University Remote Work and Work Arrangement Transitions Author: Siqi He; University of Iowa Author: Amy E. Colbert; University of Iowa Author: Jennifer Nahrgang; University of Iowa Organizational Communication in a Hybrid Workplace Author: Prithwiraj Choudhury; Harvard Business School Author: Miguel Espinosa; Bocconi University Author: Tarun Khanna; Harvard Business School Author: Christos Makridis; Author: Kyle Schirmann; Harvard Business School “That was easier when we were sitting together”: Managerial work as ordering with place Author: Claudia Manca; University of Bologna Author: Lucia Crevani; Author: Viviane Sergi; Author: Lena Falkman;

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2470.082

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicWork-Family Balance ChallengesFrench-language works237,207