Éléments théoriques pour une sociologie de l’entreprise : des classiques aux « néo-classiques »
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet article, les auteurs tentent de caractériser la façon dont les classiques de la sociologie (Durkheim, Weber et Marx) et les auteurs contemporains qui s’en inspirent définissent l’entreprise. Ils montrent ainsi comment chacune de ces traditions sociologiques met l’accent sur l’une ou l’autre des dimensions que sont les rapports sociaux, la dimension institutionnelle, la dimension organisationnelle. Ces dimensions sont cependant présentées par chacune de ces approches comme objets isolés, légitimes certes, mais non articulés. S’inspirant à la fois de l’approche des mouvements sociaux et de l’école de la régulation, les auteurs proposent de transformer ces différentes perspectives en dimensions ou niveaux d’analyse d’une perspective plus large où chacune des dimensions constitue un enjeu propre, ses propres acteurs, sa propre culture. En conclusion, ils expliquent pourquoi, selon les époques, une approche plutôt que l’autre s’est imposée.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Theoretical or conceptual | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Theoretical or conceptual | medium |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".