MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Becoming a Learning Organization in the Software Industry

2009· book-chapter· en· W2475514123 on OpenAlexaff
Dev K. Dutta

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Learning and Leadership
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaturity (psychological)Capability Maturity ModelProcess (computing)Knowledge managementSoftwareOrganizational learningSoftware developmentSoftware engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringSoftware development processProcess managementEngineering managementPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter examines to what extent the implementation of Software Engineering Institute’s Capability Maturity Model (CMM) of software process improvement enables a firm to transform itself into an learning organization (LO). It argues that even though the CMM does lead the software firm forward on the route to learning, it does not go far enough. By recognizing organizational knowledge and organizational learning as the twin pillars of the LO, the author develops a conceptual framework against which the five maturity levels of CMM can be mapped and examined. This allows for an assessment of whether the CMM serves as a silver bullet in achieving the software firm’s goal of reaching the visionary state of the LO.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicOrganizational Learning and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207