MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6929325031 · doi:10.48683/1926.00105702

The Influence of Executives’ Values on Corporate Responsibility Adoption

2018· article· en· W6929325031 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCentAUR (University of Reading) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNuclear Structure and Function
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormativeNexus (standard)Construct (python library)Corporate social responsibilityValue (mathematics)Thematic analysisStrict constructionismQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research aim of this inquiry is to understand how executives’ values influence the adoption of Corporate Responsibility practice. Corporate Responsibility (CR) is recognised as a values-laden concept which encompasses both normative and instrumental value orientations. Strategic Leadership Theory posits that senior executives are responsible for shaping their organisations’ strategic direction. Since humans are at the nexus of all decisions – and, according to Values Theory, human values are the underlying construct for motivations, goals and social ideals – executives’ values play an important role in influencing organisational approaches to CR adoption. While there is general agreement that values do influence Corporate Responsibility adoption, empirical evidence provides only partial support and some contradictory results. The paucity of qualitative research providing insights into the complexity of leaders’ values-to-action in business highlights a significant research gap in understanding the role of Strategic Leadership on CR adoption beyond normative studies. Adopting a constructionist interpretive research paradigm, this research inquiry explores the influence of executives’ values via in-depth semi-structured interviews as a data collection method. Twenty senior Canadian executive interviews were conducted. Using thematic analysis, this inquiry collects from the interview data common themes as well as divergences, providing a rich description of the executives’ values-to-CR adoption process. The data findings point to a number of factors that mediate the influence of values on CR adoption, and the types of CR practices. A tentative model is proposed that highlights the common patterns that emerged from the data analysis. This research inquiry contributes to a deepening of the Strategic Leadership knowledge, in particular the influence of values on organisational CR decisions; expands interpretivist qualitative studies in management studies; and contributes to practice by highlighting the importance of values in executive recruitment, business education and management development.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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