Leadership Strategies for Capturing and Transferring the Knowledge of Experienced Workers in Canadian Higher Education Organizations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The lack of diversity in healthcare management is a social issue that can lead to increased implicit bias and adverse effects on patient care and quality. This study examined the underrepresentation of Black RNs in leadership roles within healthcare. The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to explore the perceptions of Black RNs in leadership regarding the opportunities and resources they need for advancement, as outlined in three research questions. A sample of 10 BSN nurses responded to 10 semi-structured interview questions, grounded in critical race theory. Codes were developed from responses, resulting in nine themes and 16 sub-themes, including racialized workplace dynamics, unequal treatment and expectations, experiences in leadership roles characterized by challenges and barriers related to racial inequality, equity in evaluation, access to professional growth, perceived inequities and bias, and unequal promotion opportunities. The effects of implicit bias on care quality were identified as a core element of the themes, informed by CRT, and demonstrated a negative impact on care quality. Consequently, the findings of this study have implications for healthcare professionals to recognize and unlearn their implicit biases. Recommendations for future practices in human services include establishing leadership models that encompass all nurses and creating policies to advance Black nurse leaders. The insights from this study can contribute to social change by closing diversity gaps and supporting the career growth of Black healthcare workers aspiring to leadership roles.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".