MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1587056056

EUROPEAN FOUNDATION FOR QUALITY MANAGEMENT (EFQM) BUSINESS EXCELLENCE MODEL: A LITERATURE REVIEW AND FUTURE RESEARCH AGENDA

2008· review· en· W1587056056 on OpenAlexaff
Dong‐Young Kim, Vinod Kumar, Steven A. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueASAC · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoundation (evidence)ExcellenceQuality (philosophy)Quality managementQuality management systemEngineering ethicsProcess managementBusinessPolitical scienceManagement scienceEngineering managementKnowledge managementManagementEngineeringComputer scienceOperations managementEconomicsManagement systemEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to explore the nature of the research topics and methodologies used in the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) business excellence model studies, as well as to suggest future research agendas. Results indicate that the majority of papers have paid too much attention to too few research topics (e.g., performance measurement) by employing the case study method.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.017
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASACSame topicQuality and Supply ManagementFrench-language works237,207