MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133075336

Banking on Equity: Bay Street and Black Women's Leadership in Banks©

2022· dissertation· W7133075336 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kim Borden Penney

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2022
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntersectionalityRacismQualitative researchInstitutional racismFocus groupEquity (law)Leadership studiesCritical race theoryBlack women
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative research study examines Black women’s leadership experiences in Canadian banks and their perceptions about opportunities for mobility and advancement to executive management positions. The purpose of this research study is to explore and contextualize the epistemic complexities of Black women’s leadership experiences in the Toronto banking sector. The study’s data are collected through in-depth interviews and focus groups with Black women working in leadership positions. Further, this study seeks to examine: (1) the lived experience of Black women’s leadership in Canadian banks; (2) the perceived incongruity between Black women as leaders and those who are seen as possessing characteristics, qualities, and social capital for leadership roles; and (3) how the discourse of multiculturalism, employment equity policies, and corporate climate has impacted Black women’s mobility and advancement opportunities to executive management positions. This study utilizes theoretical frameworks of Critical Race Theory, Black Canadian Feminist Thought, and Intersectionality Theory to explore and examine Black women’s leadership experiences. My analysis engages with discussions of race, gender, class, sexism, and how the construction of whiteness is manifest in institutional power, and how that construction is written and read upon Black women’s leadership to understand the absence of Black women in executive management positions. The findings indicate that being Black and a woman in banking sector negatively impacts their career mobility and advancement. Black women remain locked out of leadership opportunities as they encounter institutional climate of anti-Black racism and sexism, which deems them unfit and incompetent for senior and executive roles based on negative racial stereotypes and lack of sponsorship. Ultimately, these findings relate to the factors and conditions that make Black women’s executive leadership in the Toronto banking sector so exceedingly rare. This study is one of the few Canadian examinations of Black women’s leadership experience in the banking sector.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0310.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.376
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.053 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicGender Diversity and Inequality→French-language works237,207→