MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083439111 · doi:10.1108/14725960310808015

Strategic planning for the internal marketing and communication of facilities management

2002· article· en· W2083439111 on OpenAlexaff
Charles P. Griffin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Facilities Management · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFacilities and Workplace Management
Canadian institutionsProfessional Engineers Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarketing planBusinessPlan (archaeology)Stewardship (theology)MarketingProcess managementStrategic planningMarketing managementFacility managementMarketing strategyMarketing research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For facility professionals, it is critical to sell a vision of facilities stewardship at every opportunity. This paper is intended to help professionals assess their current internal marketing activities and provide direction on the development and execution of an effective marketing plan. For those who already have a plan, this paper may help inject new life into it. The marketing cycle and tools will be reviewed, examples of marketing objectives will be provided, and then ways of creating and managing a successful programme will be reviewed. The objective here is to help facility managers learn how to: (1) evaluate the current business environment and create a strategic plan; (2) create a marketing plan to support the business strategic plan; and (3) execute the implementation plan for the marketing strategy.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.005

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.292
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Facilities ManagementSame topicFacilities and Workplace ManagementFrench-language works237,207