MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968908419 · doi:10.1177/031289620202700203

Organisational Learning, Transformational Leadership and Implementation of Continuous Quality Improvement in Canadian Hospitals

2002· article· en· W1968908419 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rolland LeBrasseur, Robert Whissell, Abhoy K. Ojha

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Management · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Learning and Leadership
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformational leadershipTeamworkQuality managementQuality (philosophy)BusinessOrganizational cultureStakeholderAcute careNursingKnowledge managementProcess managementPsychologyPublic relationsHealth careMedicineManagementMarketingPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Implementing continuous quality improvement (CQI) in acute care general hospitals was investigated as an occurrence of a paradigm shift and organisational learning. Presented within a contextual framework, two case studies are reported, and are complemented by a survey of hospitals operating in Ontario, Canada. The findings support a top-down approach where the CEO exhibits transformational leadership and aligns the organisation's strategy, structure, and culture to CQI. The conflicting stakeholder goals of quality of care and cost savings are harmonized. Organisational members undergo both a cognitive and behavioural adjustment centred on teamwork, facilitated by training and education. Teamwork and involvement of physicians remain long-term challenges.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.260
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 designQualitative
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

Citations71
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of ManagementSame topicOrganizational Learning and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207