MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2481688643 · doi:10.1002/9781119198048.ch4

The Culture of Precision Railroading

2012· other· en· W2481688643 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransport and Economic Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrganizational cultureBureaucracyWorkflowFront linePublic relationsManagementOrganizational changePolitical scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter discusses the three foundational concepts used to change the corporate culture in Canadian National Railways (CN). When understanding of and commitment to success in the Five Guiding Principles was spreading, it was time to assess the current culture and determine what future culture was needed to support continuous improvement. E. Hunter Harrison studied how to achieve this culture change with two of his leaders, Les Dakens, who was Senior Vice President, People at the time, and Peter Edwards, who was head of Organization Development. To build a true performance-oriented culture, they quickly settled on three foundational concepts that had underpinned success so far. One of the concepts is “The Organizational Culture Continuum,” which views organizations in five levels, from “out of control” to fully “engaged.” Another concept is “The Spectrum of Employee Engagement” which shows how employees vary in their degree of engagement. The third concept is “Washing out the mud in the middle” where “mud,” refers to the bureaucracy, silos, poor communications, and disconnects that muddy the processes and workflow between top leaders and the front line.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransport and Economic PoliciesFrench-language works237,207