MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1851197084 · doi:10.3963/jmpm.v3i1.115

Sustainable Project Management: a whole program indeed!

2015· article· en· W1851197084 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Modern Project Management · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacilitatorKnowledge managementBusinessSocial responsibilityCreativityContext (archaeology)Work (physics)Process (computing)Agile software developmentProcess managementPublic relationsManagementComputer scienceEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our world is changing. Organizations evolve in a moving socio-political context so they must understand the impact and influence of this context on their own performance and competitiveness. However, organizations are also part of the global system and thus interact with their environment. These interactions require a real social and environmental responsibility. This responsibility leads companies to work in cooperation with stakeholders and society, interact with each other, or influence them in a common respect. Each manager or project manager has his job transformed and gets new responsibilities. He becomes a facilitator/coach or a program manager. He must then develop specific skills to support these changes. The key-skills that have been identified in both Agile methods and standardization work on Social Responsibility propose to recover the sense of cooperation, collective work and sharing. We speak about “Collective Intelligence” where Human is the heart of the process. Innovation and creativity are also necessary to assure success in change management. Would competition become collaboration?

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.235 · 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