Las dimensiones de la responsabilidad social de las empresas: una guía de lectura para su estudio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artículo propone una guía de lectura para el estudio de la RSE mediante tres dimensiones (herramienta de la actualidad, utilidad para la administración y construcción ideológica) las cuales corresponden lógica e históricamente a la evolución de la RSE. En efecto, el estado de conocimiento y desarrollo de la RSE en las últimas dos décadas se cristaliza en un discurso y una serie de herramientas en la actualidad. El juego de útiles para su aplicación y evaluación constituye la dimensión de útil para la administración. Al discurso corresponde la dimensión ideológica y doctrinaria; de tal manera que éstas se entrelazan en la praxis de la administración. Estas dimensiones permiten comprender el contenido y la forma de la RSE. En otros términos, esta división teórica tridimensional es al propio tiempo una guía de lectura para el estudio de la RSE. Se concluye, que pese al progreso que la responsabilidad social empresarial representa, subsiste la contradicción entre su vocación humanista/ecologista frente al interés privado.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".