MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1520603695 · doi:10.1002/psp.1912

Attracting and Retaining Foreign Highly Skilled Staff in Times of Global Crisis: a Case Study of Vancouver, British Columbia's Biotechnology Sector

2015· article· en· W1520603695 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Kathrine E. Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenuePopulation Space and Place · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsRecessionFinancial crisisOrder (exchange)ImmigrationTheme (computing)Global recessionResource (disambiguation)BusinessHuman resourcesPolitical scienceEconomic growthManagementEconomicsFinanceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract How cities attract and retain hard‐won foreign talent in times of economic crisis is an under‐researched theme. This paper draws on surveys of firms and allied professionals in the Vancouver biotechnology sector to examine the strategies used to attract and retain highly skilled staff over a 10‐year period up to 2012. It argues that the foreign highly skilled within Vancouver's biotechnology sector were more prone to crisis at the level of the firm than they were directly vulnerable to the global financial recession of the early 2000s and 2008. In fact, these crises required firms interviewed to become highly dependent on local and regional auxiliary professionals such as human resource managers and professional immigration attorneys, in addition to spouses, in order to retain these highly skilled foreign professionals within the host city of Vancouver. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0150.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePopulation Space and PlaceSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207