MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105012716 · doi:10.3917/riges.271.0041

Gérer la rémunération dans un contexte de mobilité internationale : l'art de jongler avec différentes perspectives

2002· article· fr· W2105012716 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Sylvie St‐Onge, Michel Magnan, Corinne Prost, Suzy-Philippe Biouele

Bibliographic record

VenueGestion · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Student and Expatriate Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Dans le contexte de la mondialisation des affaires, la gestion internationale des ressources humaines, notamment du personnel expatrié, constitue un défi important pour les sociétés canadiennes. Cet article considère la gestion de la rémunération dans un contexte international comme l’art de jongler avec plusieurs perspectives. Ainsi, la perspective technique met l’accent sur les composantes de la rémunération des expatriés, sur les méthodes de gestion de leur rémunération et sur les règles fiscales régissant leurs conditions de travail. La perspective psychologique implique que l’on se préoccupe de l’impact de la rémunération sur la satisfaction et la motivation au travail des expatriés, et donc sur leurs comportements au travail. Selon la perspective financière, la rémunération correspond au prix qu’une entreprise paie pour obtenir la quantité nécessaire de travail de la meilleure qualité possible. Envisagée selon la perspective politique, la rémunération résulte d’un rapport de force entre les expatriés et les dirigeants d’une organisation. Selon la perspective symbolique, ce n’est pas tant la valeur économique des composantes de la rémunération qui compte que le prestige et le statut qu’elles procurent aux yeux des employés. Enfin, suivant la perspective contingente, il n’y a pas une seule bonne méthode de gestion de la rémunération des expatriés, mais plutôt une méthode optimale selon le contexte, le moment et les autres activités de gestion.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.026
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGestionSame topicInternational Student and Expatriate ChallengesFrench-language works237,207