MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043563380 · doi:10.3917/riges.351.0056

L'acquisition des habiletés de coaching de gestionnaires comme levier de changement culturel : le cas d'une grande entreprise manufacturière

2010· article· fr· W2043563380 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Roger Guimond

Bibliographic record

VenueGestion · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicCoaching Methods and Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceCoachingArtPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Cet article présente une intervention amorcée il y a cinq ans dans une grande entreprise manufacturière canadienne dont la croissance était en baisse. La direction s’est alors rendu compte que l’entreprise ne pourrait atteindre les niveaux auxquels s’attendaient les actionnaires que si elle adoptait un style de gestion différent et transformait sa culture de manière à susciter l’engagement, l’innovation, la confiance, la collaboration et la responsabilisation. Elle a ainsi décidé, notamment, de miser sur le coaching de gestionnaires comme levier d’acquisition des compétences et de changement de culture. L’article décrit l’implantation d’un programme de formation à l’interne à l’intention des gestionnaires menant à une certification sur le coaching . Les résultats démontrent que l’acquisition des compétences en coaching soutient l’implantation d’une culture où le respect et le développement des personnes occupent maintenant une place de choix. Cet article examine également les principaux facteurs de succès de cette intervention.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.316 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGestionSame topicCoaching Methods and ImpactFrench-language works237,207