La GRH en économie sociale : l'inclusion des travailleurs en tant qu'innovation « socialement responsable »
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Cet article justifie d’abord l’intérêt des auteurs pour ce volet de la GRH qu’est l’inclusion des travailleurs, en tant qu’orientation possible de la Responsabilité Sociétale des Entreprises (RSE) en économie sociale. Si cette orientation correspond à l’idéal-type de l’économie sociale, il se trouve que bien souvent les pratiques de GRH s’en éloignent considérablement. L’examen de pratiques innovantes en économie sociale permet de dégager au moins quatre principes de GRH favorables à l’inclusion des travailleurs : leur présence dans les instances décisionnelles, leur mobilisation autour de la mission sociale, le renforcement de la culture d’entreprise et la participation citoyenne dans l’organisation du travail. Une brève discussion permet de comprendre que ces innovations peuvent être inspirantes pour les entreprises capitalistes, mais que la particularité de leur contexte oblige à des adaptations substantielles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".