MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128186074 · doi:10.1109/tem.2002.1010884

Knowledge worker performance analysis using DEA: an application to engineering design teams at Bell Canada

2002· article· en· W2128186074 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData envelopment analysisProductivityReturns to scaleScale (ratio)Operations researchComputer scienceWork (physics)Industrial engineeringEconomicsOperations managementEngineeringMathematicsProduction (economics)MicroeconomicsStatisticsGeographyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge worker productivity measurement is a very difficult undertaking, but implementing improvement suggestions is even more challenging for management. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) was used to examine the productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness of one such knowledge worker group-the Engineering Design Teams (EDT) at Bell Canada, the largest telecommunications carrier in Canada. Two functional models of the EDTs were developed and analyzed using input oriented constant returns to scale (CRS) and variable returns to scale (VRS) DEA models. First left free, the multipliers were then constrained using DEA Assurance Region models based on economic prices and managerial preferences. This study offers an excellent example where inefficient decision making units (DMU)-i.e., EDTs-could be made more efficient by improving their scale efficiency simply by reassigning work amongst the units. Bell divides its EDTs along provincial boundaries into Ontario and Quebec teams and each EDT is responsible for a specific geographic area in the province assigned to it. The results of the DEA analysis indicated that redrawing the geographical boundaries of the market area served by the EDTs could move both increasing and decreasing returns to scale EDTs toward CRS behavior. Substantial performance improvements are possible over the entire system, resulting in significant savings in costs without people dislocation or branch closings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.236 · 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