MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000162540 · doi:10.7202/1006092ar

L’écart culturel dans les coopératives

2011· article· fr· W2000162540 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Claire Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Université de Moncton · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Strategy and Innovation
Canadian institutionsGovernment of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cette étude de cas exploratoire de deux magasins coopératifs, l’objectif est d’établir leur profil culturel et de vérifier s’il y a un écart entre leur culture actuelle et leur culture souhaitée. Une approche qualitative comportant des entretiens approfondis, des observations et des revues documentaires est suivie d’une approche quantitative visant le personnel et les dirigeants. Le cadre des valeurs concurrentes est inclus dans un questionnaire ainsi que des questions sur l’orientation misant sur la primauté des membres. Les réponses pour les deux coopératives indiquent que la culture organisationnelle souhaitée est celle où les attributs du clan prédominent. La coopérative qui obtient le résultat le plus élevé dans l’auto-évaluation de son orientation est aussi celle où il n’y a pas d’écart culturel. La recherche présente des pistes quant à l’application de l’orientation misant sur la primauté des membres et quant à la culture ou l’identité coopérative comme avantage concurrentiel.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de l’Université de MonctonSame topicBusiness Strategy and InnovationFrench-language works237,207