MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1927976166 · doi:10.3233/hsm-2010-0720

HRM capabilities as a determinant and enabler of productivity for manufacturing SMEs

2010· article· en· W1927976166 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Bruno Fabi, Richard Lacoursière, Louis Raymond, Josée St‐Pierre

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Systems Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsEnablingProductivityBusinessContingencyKnowledge managementContingency theoryAffect (linguistics)Human resource managementPerspective (graphical)Human resourcesIndustrial organizationOrder (exchange)Empirical researchProcess managementOperations managementComputer scienceManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we assume that the entrepreneurial capability of SME owner-managers is reflected in the choices they make to coordinate their action in terms of human resource management (HRM), research and development (R&D), and advanced manufacturing technologies (AMT). However, to what extent do managerial choices made in these areas affect the performance of SMEs? And to what extent do the interactions of HRM capabilities with R&D and AMT capabilities also affect the performance of these enterprises? In order to answer these questions, an empirical study was conducted among 182 Canadian SMEs. Emanating from a perspective based on human systems and contingency theory, the results of this study indicate that the development of HRM capabilities allow SMEs not only to improve their productivity but also to significantly amplify the effect of R&D and AMT capabilities on this same productivity.

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)0.011
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations19
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Systems ManagementSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207