Bibliographic record
Abstract
Foreword Dr Andreas Pohlmann, Chief Administrative Officer, Celanese AG Introduction Sandra Sutherland Rahman, Framingham State College, USA, Sandra Waddock, Boston College, Carroll School of Management, USA, Jorg Andriof, Celanese AG, Germany Warwick Business School, UK, and Bryan Husted, ITESM/Instituto De Empresa, Mexico Part I: Stakeholder communication and relationship 1. Stakeholder discourse and critical-frame analysis: the case of child labour in Bangladesh Sandra Sutherland Rahman, Framingham State College, USA 2. Are you talking to me? Stakeholder communication and the risks and rewards of dialogue Andrew Crane, University of Nottingham, UK, and Sharon Livesey, Fordham University, USA 3. Talking for change? Reflections on effective dialogue Jem Bendell, Lifeworth.com 4. Stakeholder influences in developing a sustainability culture within the UK biotechnology sector Aharon Factor, Aarhus School of Business, Denmark 5. Power and social behaviour: a structuration approach to networks Stephanie Welcomer, University of Maine, USA, Philip L. Cochran, Smeal College of Business, USA, and Virginia W. Gerde, University of New Mexico, USA 6. State of the union: NGO-business partnership stakeholders Jonathan Cohen, AccountAbility, UK 7. Stakeholders for environmental strategies: the case of the emerging industry in radioactive scrap metal treatment Bruce W. Clemens and Scott R. Gallagher, James Madison University, USA 8. Re-examining the concept of stakeholder management Michael E. Johnson-Cramer, Boston University School of Management, USA, Shawn L. Berman, Santa Clara University, USA, and James E. Post, Boston University School of Management, USA 9. Stakeholders and conflict management: corporate perspectives on collaborative approaches Julia Robbins, independent consultant, Canada 10. Managing corporate stakeholders: subjecting Miles's 1987 data-collection framework to tests of validation James Weber, Duquesne University, USA, and David M. Wasieleski, University of Pittsburgh, USA Part II: Stakeholder performance and reporting 11. Approaches to performance and reporting: an investor's perspective. Investigating how sustainable companies deliver value to shareholders Michael J. King, Innovys, UK 12. Top managers and institutional stakeholders: a test of two models of adaptation and performance Michael V. Russo, University of Oregon, USA, and Frank C. Schultz, Michigan State University, USA 13. A comparative study of stakeholder-oriented social audit models and reports Jane Zhang, University of Sunderland, UK, and Ian Fraser and Wan Ying Hill, Glasgow Caledonian University, UK
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".