Management Innovation at the Brazilian Superior Tribunal of Justice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe administrative reform involving management innovation undertaken at the Superior Tribunal of Justice, Brazil’s highest appellate court for infra-constitutional cases. The innovation is the introduction of a new management model based on strategic planning and a process management approach to work processes. Introduction of the new model has been supported by the use of information technology and project management techniques. Qualitative methods were used for data collection and analysis. Findings reveal that the innovation is contributing to the development of a systemic overview of key processes, reducing the fragmenting effects of the division of work activities within the Tribunal. At least three new organizational routines or capabilities have been developed as a result of the innovation studied: Electronic Court Management, Project Management, and Process Management. The paper contributes to knowledge about court management, a field that has received little research attention in the public administration literature.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it