MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082089605 · doi:10.4236/ti.2012.33019

Case Study on M Company Best Practice with Global IT Management

2012· article· en· W2082089605 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiangping Wan, Xiaoyao Wan

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology and Investment · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Technology Governance and Strategy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsStructuringBest practiceIT service managementProcess managementExcellenceKnowledge managementBusinessHierarchyProcess (computing)Service (business)Quality (philosophy)Operational excellenceEngineering managementComputer scienceInformation Technology Infrastructure LibraryInformation technologyManagementMarketingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The propose of research is to help those global companies to improve their IT service management (ITSM) more effectively. The ITSM of M company is analyzed with global IT management model, which contains 12 structuring elements, and the structuring elements model and their best practices are established in the IT service operation and maintenance process in the views of centers of excellence, shared services and value managers. Both the 12 structuring elements and 5 M company’s best practices of ITSM are rated with both critical success factors and analytic hierarchy process. The best practices are in the following: good relationship with customers (0.279), seamless and efficient department cooperation (0.231), team proficient in business and enterprise resource planning professional knowledge (0.226), high-quality library of knowledge management (0.176) and educational training (0.088).

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)0.000
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 score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology and InvestmentSame topicInformation Technology Governance and StrategyFrench-language works237,207