Labour regime and industrialisation in the knowledge economy : the Japanese model and its possible hybridisation in other countries
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the perceived role of Japanese Human Resources Management policies and labour regimes in fostering innovation and industrialisation, it is interesting to see whether these practices have or will spread beyond Japan. While the recent financial difficulties in Japan have brought this model into question, Japanese-style organisational methods and labour regime in human resources management have not been totally discredited. Many elements of the innovation system are still considered a source of strength and continue to provide a reference for future industrial development. This article starts by explaining the different dimensions of what has become known as the Japanese innovation system, highlighting the elements which appear pertinent in the modern economy. It then assesses which dimensions of the Japanese model have been retained in a foreign setting, Canada, and how Canadian emulators of the Japanese model compare with Japanese firms. The observation leads to a conclusion of continuity and transition. While many quality-oriented Canadian firms have moved towards the Japanese model of innovation and production organisation, these practices seem to have been substantially adapted to the local context.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it