MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117138345 · doi:10.22495/cocv22i4art14

Employee ownership and employee sentiment: A comparative study

2025· article· W7117138345 on OpenAlex
Dalenda Ben Ahmed

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

VenueCorporate Ownership and Control · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCooperative Studies and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbsenteeismEmployee engagementShareholderEmployee researchTurnoverWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to determine the impact of employee ownership on employees’ behaviour. We explore how financial gains can influence employee satisfaction, motivation, and the reduction of absenteeism and turnover. Our study, conducted using French and Canadian companies as examples, focused on the dynamics of contributions, discounts, and the percentage of employee shares over a five-year period. The results of the study show that employee motivation, satisfaction, and the reduction of absenteeism and turnover are explained by the evolution of discount, matching contribution, and percentage of employee shares. Employee shareholders were more cooperative, involved, motivated, and satisfied with the simple fact of being employee shareholders. This work can be considered as one of the pioneer studies of the effect of employee ownership on the psychological behaviour of employee shareholders.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.203 · 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