Feminist Value Creation: The Pursuit of Gender Equality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the importance of promoting greater equality is widely recognized in management theory and practice, it has yet to be built into the core business process of value creation. To date, research on gender equality in management has either taken the dominant model of value creation as given or, from a critical perspective, viewed value creation as fundamentally incompatible with equality. In this paper, we instead develop a new approach to value creation to address gender equality. To do this, we advance a theory of feminist value creation that draws on social reproduction theory located within materialist feminism. We offer a feminist reconceptualization of value creation in terms of the nature of value, its valuation, and underpinning values, such as to successfully integrate within value creation the “private sphere” of socially reproductive work in addition to the “public sphere” of paid and productive work. We also theorize the material and cultural processes of transformation needed to move toward feminist value creation, and the intra-, inter-, and extra-organizational influences that will affect the likelihood of such a transition. We conclude by elaborating on our contributions to research on gender equality in management and value creation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".