MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7023354961

Ongoing Challenges Faced by Expatriate Managers: An Exploratory Study of Expatriate Managers in Nigeria and Canada

2009· other· en· W7023354961 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNottingham ePrints (University of Nottingham) · 2009
Typeother
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Physics and Python Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpatriateWorkforceInterviewExploratory researchDiversity (politics)Qualitative researchWorkforce diversity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study will seek to uncover the concept of workforce diversity, to discover the effects of workforce diversity on an organization, to find out how the managers manage diverse workforces, to highlight the challenges faced by expat managers in managing a diverse workforce, and to identify the possible solutions to these challenges. Additionally, the study will compare the results of these aims between the workforces of Canada and Nigeria. Four research questions were developed to help guide the research, and are: (1) What is workforce diversity? (2) How does a diverse workforce impact an organization? (3) How do the managers manage a diverse workforce? (4) What are the challenges experienced by expat managers in managing a diverse workforce? The research questions will be addressed through the analysis of data that will be collected by interviewing 8 expat managers (three in Canada and five in Nigeria). Analysis of the data will include both phenomenology (to determine the themes and phenomena inherent to the managers lived experiences) and a comparative case study (to compare the results between the two countries). Chapter 1 provided an introduction and overview of the study. Chapter 2 discusses information regarding both Nigeria and Canada. Chapter 3 contains the literature review for this study. Chapter 4 describes in greater detail the research methodology to be used. Chapter 5 presents the data and the analysis of the data and contains the conclusions of the research, a discussion of the results, and a summary.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0280.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNottingham ePrints (University of Nottingham)Same topicComputational Physics and Python ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207