MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008166939 · doi:10.5130/cjlg.v0i5.1474

New Professionals on tap? The human resource challenges in developing a new generation of municipal and local government managers in Nova Scotia

2010· article· en· W2008166939 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew Molloy, David Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueCommonwealth Journal of Local Governance · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaEconomic shortageContext (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Human resourcesBusinessSuccession planningLocal governmentResource (disambiguation)ScarcityHuman resource managementPublic administrationEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceSociologyFinanceGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian governments are facing significant human resource management challenges due to pending retirements, projected labour market shortages and the workplace expectations of New Professionals. This paper explores human resource recruitment planning initiatives, which have been undertaken by Nova Scotia municipalities, in order to attract and retain a new generation of municipal government managers. We will argue, in line with a recent Association of Municipal Administrators (AMA) of Nova Scotia municipal report that Nova Scotia municipalities must take intergenerational issues into account, for management succession planning to be successful. Our exploration of municipal succession planning will take place in the context of a larger study, which we have done on “New Professional” recruitment, retention and development initiatives in Canada

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)0.002
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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommonwealth Journal of Local GovernanceSame topicPublic Policy and Administration ResearchFrench-language works237,207