MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

In Search of Archetypes in Crisis Management

2004· article· en· W2065626614 on OpenAlex
Carole Lalonde

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Contingencies and Crisis Management · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchetypeCrisis managementPerspective (graphical)Field (mathematics)BusinessMillerPublic relationsPolitical scienceKnowledge managementComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite their unstable nature, crises are frequently defined as opportunities for managers to make strategic decisions in terms of bringing new configurations into play. According to this perspective, research is undertaken to discover new forms taken on by organisations during times of crisis. Relying on the experience of Local Centres of Community Services in Quebec during the ice storm of 1998, the results of this research permitted us to demonstrate three archetypes of crisis management collectivists, integrators and reactive types, each with the specific characteristics and imperatives as defined by Miller (1987) . These consist of leadership, strategies, structures and environments. The research also permitted us to establish participants' appreciation of the performance of their organisation and of the managers dealt with the crisis. Finally, we will discuss the importance of applying theories of configuration in the field of crisis management and several promising areas of research in this field.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.696
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.286 · 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