MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2264866980 · doi:10.5539/mas.v10n5p10

Evaluation of Maturity Level of QSE Management Systems: Empirical Analysis, Case of Moroccan Companies

2016· article· en· W2264866980 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mariyam Moumen, Houda El Aoufir

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Management Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaturity (psychological)DocumentationBusinessManagement systemQuality management systemAuditProcess managementQuality (philosophy)ReputationComputer scienceQuality managementKnowledge managementAccountingOperations managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, the adoption of management systems dedicated to quality, environment and safety in company have become real issues, a competitive argument. They also have a reputation and international recognition. For some companies, they become like a prerequisite for their proper development.The aims of this paper is to understand how the Moroccan organizations who have an Integrated Management System integrate their management systems and the way that they perceive the challenges of managing several management systems in parallel over time. According to a survey carried out with thirty four Moroccan firms, we analyze empirically the implementation of different MSs such as: ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001. Specially, we evaluate the integration levels of different management systems elements such as humans and documentation resources, objectives, procedures and audit. We analyze also the perceptions of companies about the advantages and the challenges encountered into the integration of Management Systems in organizations with more than one Management system.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.151 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicQuality and Management SystemsFrench-language works237,207