MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065437587 · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2010.11.014

Toward a theory of managing context in Six Sigma process‐improvement projects: An action research investigation⋆

2010· article· en· W2065437587 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Operations Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Six SigmaAction researchKnowledge managementProcess (computing)Field (mathematics)Action (physics)Process managementQualitative researchComputer scienceExtant taxonSociologyBusinessMarketingSocial scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, field studies, extant literature, and domain knowledge are used to develop a theory of managing context in Six Sigma process‐improvement projects. By means of a participatory action research investigation involving ten projects in manufacturing and service firms, this paper examines the interrelationship among project context, elements, and success. Rich text‐based information for each project was analyzed for the underlying patterns and relationships using the NVIVO 8 qualitative data analysis software package. The insights gained from this in‐depth field investigation are presented in the form of 12 inductively derived research propositions that, when taken together, uniquely contribute to context‐based theory‐building in this area.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.228 · 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