Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40749011›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Adopting Soft Logic to enhance an Adizes tool: A comprehensive approach to represent the evaluation of management styles.

Sigal Kordova, Ron S Hirschprung

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sigal KordovaDepartment of Industrial Engineering and Management, Faculty of Engineering, Ariel University, Ariel, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1420-2589
Ron S HirschprungDepartment of Industrial Engineering and Management, Faculty of Engineering, Ariel University, Ariel, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1663-9699

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Management skills assessment has become increasingly complex in today's digital age, as these skills are multi-dimensional and require a nuanced approach. Beyond evaluating each dimension independently, it is crucial to consider the tension and balance between them, as they often exist in inverse proportions. To address this complexity, this study introduces a methodology based on Soft Logic, a mathematical theory designed to represent realities that are not clear-cut, such as conflicting traits. This approach is particularly suited to the assessment of managerial skills. The research focuses on the Adizes Management Style Questionnaire, a widely recognized tool that evaluates four distinct managerial styles: Producer, Administrator, Entrepreneur, and Integrator. Unlike traditional assessments that focus on isolated behaviors, the proposed method highlights the dynamic interplay between these styles. By incorporating Soft Logic, the framework provides a more flexible and comprehensive evaluation, capturing both dominant traits and the tensions between them. This methodology was tested in an empirical study with 40 participants and offers organizations deeper insights into leadership dynamics, aiding in recruitment, leadership development, and team composition. Although developed with the Adizes tool, the methodology can be adapted to other managerial assessment tools and potentially extended to other multi-dimensional domains.

Indexed as

LeadershipLogicAdultFemaleHumansMaleSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID40749011
PMCPMC12316270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.