MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W177699259

L'effet des pratiques de gestion des ressources humaines sur l'efficacité des caisses populaires Desjardins du Quebec

2001· preprint· fr· W177699259 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michel Arcand

Bibliographic record

VenuePublications Et Travaux Academiques de Lorraine (Universite de Lorraine) · 2001
Typepreprint
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the late 20th century, the human ressource management (HRM) became a strategic organizational variable. In spite of the strategic character of the HRM, the relation between this important concept and the organizational effectiveness still represents a real theoretical and empirical "black box" for the scientific community. This thesis proposes a new theoretical and methodological approach to "bringing the gap". Nevertheless, this thesis presents a classical structure. Thus, the first and the second chapter expose the theoretical framework, that is to say : the three strategic models ( the universalistic approach, the contingency perspective and the configurational model), the research question, the critical review of the scientific literature and the four principal hypothesis. The third chapter presents the methodology, that is to say : the definition of the studied firms, the data collection and the statistical methods. The fourth chapter displays the major results. The last chapter debates about the conclusions, the limits and the new perspectives in strategic human resource management (SHRM)

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublications Et Travaux Academiques de Lorraine (Universite de Lorraine)Same topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207