MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138098136 · doi:10.7202/014170ar

International Homogenization or the Persistence of National Practices?

2006· article· en· W2138098136 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Edward Webster, Geoffrey Wood, Michael Brookes

Bibliographic record

VenueRelations industrielles · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal and Cross-Cultural Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsManagerialismAutocracyArchetypeIndustrial relationsColonialismPolitical sciencePolitical economySociologyPublic administrationLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is the first systematic attempt to provide an overview of industrial relations practices at firm level in Mozambique. Through a nationwide survey of firms, the paper assesses the extent to which specific sets of practices are associated with particular regions, and/or sectors, and explores the relationship between IR practice and national institutional realities. The survey revealed that informalism and autocratic managerialism characterize the practice of employment relations. But it would be mistaken to assume a convergence towards a global systematic archetype of low wage/low skill/low security of tenure set of practices. Instead, the authors conclude, contemporary Mozambique employment relations are an example of external market pressures being channelled and moulded by the persistence of national level realities that stretch back to the colonial era. In the absence of effective institutional mechanisms, familiar conventions are likely to persist because people know how these work in practice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations18
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRelations industriellesSame topicGlobal and Cross-Cultural ManagementFrench-language works237,207