MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048244713 · doi:10.3917/riges.272.0054

Les entreprises de haute technologie et leurs pratiques de recrutement, de sélection, d'évaluation du rendement et de rémunération

2002· article· fr· W2048244713 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jacques Barrette, Jules Carrière, Olivier Fankhauser, Sonia Barrette

Bibliographic record

VenueGestion · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé L’objectif de cette recherche est d’analyser des cas types permettant de dresser un bilan des pratiques de gestion des ressources humaines dans les entreprises de haute technologie. Quatre thèmes sont couverts dans le présent article : le recrutement, la sélection, l’évaluation du rendement et la rémunération. La première partie de l’article examine les défis qui se présentent actuellement dans ces quatre domaines. La deuxième partie expose la méthodologie retenue pour réaliser la recherche. Les quatre parties suivantes se penchent sur les méthodes et les stratégies de recrutement, de sélection, d’évaluation du rendement et de rémunération qu’on observe dans les entreprises de haute technologie selon leur taille. Cette présentation est suivie d’une discussion et de recommandations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGestionSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207