Quand les managers mettent la robe. Les grandes écoles de commerce sur le marché de la formation juridique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans quelles conditions et avec quel degré de succès une institution scolaire peut-elle investir une discipline et un segment professionnel qui ne sont pas historiquement les siens ? Cet article examine un cas précis de transgression des frontières disciplinaires, institutionnelles et professionnelles : celui de la formation des avocats d’affaires par les grandes écoles de commerce françaises. Examinant en détail le cursus dédié au droit de la grande école des Hautes études commerciales (HEC), il montre que leur participation prudente au marché de la formation juridique s’inscrit dans leur jeu triangulaire avec les universités et les professionnels du droit. Analysant les transformations de ces transactions collusives depuis le milieu des années 1980, il conclut à l’affinité entre ce type de formation, pluridisciplinaire et sélective, et les dynamiques contemporaines du capitalisme à la fois juridicisé et financiarisé.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".