L'émergence d'un modèle de concertation interorganisationnelle en contexte municipal le cas de Sherbrooke Ville en santé
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the prospect of new public governance, defined as a process in which actors of all sectors work together on common issues, this thesis seeks to best understand the evolution and the operation of interorganizational concertation. This project has allowed the emergence of a model of interorganizational concertation in a municipal context, based on a processual and longitudinal study of the case Sherbrooke Ville en santé . Qualitative data have been preferred. The literature on interorganizational collaboration and the concept of the archetypes have provided the basis for the conceptual framework. This research has highlighted the dynamic nature of the interorganizational collaboration. The results led to establish the centrality of values and principles agreed to by the stakeholders of a concertation table, as well as the role played by leaders deemed credible, legitimate and notable. It is also in combining the ambiguity of the objectives and the flexibility of the settings that the support of members carrying multiple motivations seems facilitated. Around these core concepts, three phases are developing (design, organizational settings, balance and follow-ups) in constants interaction with each other, demonstrating the flexibility of the organization and its repeated adjustments, consistent with the principles that animate the collaboration. This adds a fourth phase, one of reflexivity, during which members learn from the ongoing experience of concertation itself. This project does not claim to set up a model that would be right for all concertation settings. However, through an in-depth case study, it opens the way to the comparison of these results to other experiences, growing the knowledge in the evolution and the dynamics of the interorganizational collaboration in a context of municipal governance.
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 | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".