MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053297727 · doi:10.3917/riges.394.0044

Mesurer les résultats de la gestion des ressources humaines : principes, état des lieux et défis à surmonter pour les professionnels RH

2015· article· fr· W2053297727 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Michel Cossette, Cédric Lépine, Marie Raedecker

Bibliographic record

VenueGestion · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La fonction ressources humaines a suivi une évolution constante à travers le temps. Son prochain stade de développement : être en mesure de démontrer la valeur ajoutée de la fonction ressources humaines par le suivi d’indicateurs clés de performance. L’objectif de l’article est triple : présenter les principes de mesure en ressources humaines et les types d’indicateurs, dresser un portrait des pratiques de mesures au Québec chez les professionnels RH et donner un aperçu des défis tout en suggérant des recommandations aux professionnels RH quant aux façons de faire en mesure afin d’élaborer des indicateurs pertinents.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGestionSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207