MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973823683 · doi:10.3917/riges.293.0020

La gestion de la relève et le choc des générations

2004· article· fr· W1973823683 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Michel Audet

Bibliographic record

VenueGestion · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Au Québec plus qu’ailleurs, les pratiques de gestion de la relève sont influencées par les forces sociodémographiques de l’environnement. Accroissement total de la population en baisse, solde migratoire nul, vieillissement accéléré de la population, rapport de dépendance en hausse et montée de la nouvelle garde (génération Y) ne sont que quelques exemples du choc démographique qui secoue la société, incluant toutes les dimensions liées au marché du travail. Le départ massif de centaines de milliers de travailleurs n’est pas sans susciter des appréhensions relativement au partage des savoirs entre travailleurs appartenant à des générations aux caractéristiques très différentes. Ainsi, on ne peut développer un corps de connaissances en matière de gestion de la relève sans faire une place importante à la gestion de la diversité de la main-d’œuvre, principalement la diversité associée à l’âge. Dans un tel contexte, la gestion de la relève doit tenir compte de la gestion des personnes en fin de carrière (extension de la vie professionnelle), de la gestion de la génération Y et de la gestion de l’intergénérationnel.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations18
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGestionSame topicAging, Elder Care, and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207