MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Administração pública de Québec: um caso de mudança cultural

2011· article· pt· W1985311539 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lindomar Pinto da Silva, Élvia Fadul

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Administração Contemporânea · 2011
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal and Cross-Cultural Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neste artigo procurou-se identificar os traços culturais da administração pública de Québec, além de verificar mudanças culturais ocorridas a partir da reforma administrativa levada a efeito nessa província canadense a partir dos anos 1990. Utilizou-se como conceito de cultura um conjunto de valores e artefatos, cujos significados orientam o comportamento dos indivíduos, e de que ela é passível de mudança por processos de aprendizagem cultural (Davel, Dupuis, & Chanlat, 2008; Sainsaulieu, 1977). A metodologia de pesquisa foi a análise de discurso baseada nas dimensões das figuras e temas presentes nos discursos (Fiorin, 2008). Os dados foram coletados em livros e artigos publicados nos principais periódicos canadenses, com destaque para as publicações da École Nationale d'Administration Publique (ENAP, Québec). Foram utilizados também documentos do governo de Québec disponíveis no site web, além de entrevistas com 3 (três) pesquisadores da ENAP. Verificou-se que a cultura organizacional ocupou espaço importante nos objetivos de mudanças na reforma administrativa e que há um processo de mudança cultural em curso. Temas como profissionalização, igualdade e flexibilidade começam a integrar as representações coletivas dos indivíduos nas organizações públicas desta província.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0120.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de Administração ContemporâneaSame topicGlobal and Cross-Cultural ManagementFrench-language works237,207