MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131586612

Prime Ministerial Leadership, the Public Service and Administrative Reform in Canada: Part 1

2008· article· en· W2131586612 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard W. Phidd, O. P. Dwivedi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic administrationPublic sectorTreasuryPublic servicePolitical scienceLegislationGovernment (linguistics)Service (business)CommissionNew public managementPublic relationsEconomicsLawEconomy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Doctors Phidd and Dwivedi present a detailed analysis of Prime Ministerial Leadership, the Public Service and Administrative Reform in Canada. The authors describe the history of the public service and administrative reform in Canada. While the role of the respective prime ministers is central to their discussion, they carefully describe legislation and institutional changes which impacted the public service as well. Detail is given concerning the role of the Privy Council, Treasury Board, Civil Service Commission, and other agencies, offices, task forces and commissions. Prime ministerial initiatives are juxtaposed against environmental challenges and government power blocks, suggesting a need to pay greater attention to how public sector organizations are managed. The authors go on to describe how contemporary public administration studies have pointed to the complexities involved in public sector organizations. They further suggest that this requires more analysis of what happens within public sector organizations. They also call for greater study of organizational development and change within the public sector. The Phidd & Dwivedi article presented in this issue ends in the 1980’s with the administration of Prime Minister Brian Mulroney. Part two will cover “Prime Ministerial Leadership, the Public Service and Administrative Reform in Canada: Public Sector Reforms from the 1980’s to 2000 and Beyond”. Part two will appear in the Summer 2007 issue of this review.

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)0.001
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 score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.010
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.375
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.002 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPublic Policy and Administration ResearchFrench-language works237,207