MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068721803 · doi:10.1002/pmj.21288

Foundations of Project Management Research: An Explicit and Six-Facet Ontological Framework

2012· article· en· W2068721803 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

VenueProject Management Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacet (psychology)Set (abstract data type)EpistemologyKnowledge managementSociologyOrder (exchange)Project managementComputer scienceProcess managementPsychologyBusinessEngineeringPhilosophySystems engineeringSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes a new, explicit, and integrated ontological framework to stimulate project management research. It suggests that the ontological question should be viewed as a six-facet diamond that represents a set of root assumptions about projects. The article conveys the idea that whenever a project management researcher emphasizes a specific facet, he or she knowingly or unknowingly leaves the other five facets in the dark in his or her research. This article calls for attention on the ground ontological assumptions of project management research in order to transcend the abstract epistemological and methodological debates and concentrate on what really divides the different theoretical positions.

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)0.013
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.476
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.054 · 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