MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464776674 · doi:10.4018/ijoci.2016070102

The Role of Stories and Simulations in the Lessons Learned Process

2016· article· en· W2464776674 on OpenAlex
Kimiz Dalkir

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Organizational and Collective Intelligence · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Change and Leadership
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStorytellingComputer scienceProcess (computing)Tacit knowledgeInstitutionalisationKnowledge managementDigital storytellingNarrativeMultimediaPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the major challenges of any organizational lessons learned system is how to ensure that this content is actually implemented: that employees can find and learn from them. While we are guided by a number of theories on how newly acquired knowledge can become institutionalized such that it becomes “the way things are done,” there is very little theory or evidence-based practice to guide us on specific implementation strategies. This paper presents specific strategies that were used to ensure that lessons learned became embedded in the organization through digital storytelling and simulation environments. Organizational stories are often very well suited to capturing and conveying complex tacit knowledge. The role of information and communication technologies such as digital libraries will be discussed and recommendation on how to best ensure individuals, groups and the organization itself can learn and continuously improve through the institutionalization of digital storytelling and simulation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.373
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.254 · 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