Quelles pratiques les PME peuvent-elles utiliser pour favoriser l'intrapreneuriat ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Dans un environnement d’affaires marqué par la concurrence, l’innovation est devenue un élément de survie pour la PME. Pour ce faire, le dirigeant d’une PME a plus que jamais besoin de favoriser l’intrapreneuriat, qui consiste dans la mise en œuvre d’innovations par un employé ou un groupe d’employés. Mais encore doit-il savoir comment s’y prendre. Cet article propose cinq approches à cet égard : miser sur l’initiative des employés, rechercher activement des intrapreneurs, mandater une équipe pour innover, inviter tous les employés à proposer des améliorations ou des innovations et aider les employés à créer leur propre entreprise. Il établit également les conditions essentielles pour assurer le succès de ces stratégies : l’ouverture aux nouvelles idées, une culture favorable à l’innovation, la capacité de bien exploiter la proximité avec les employés et la nécessité d’offrir des récompenses signifiantes à l’intrapreneur.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".