MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2488032069 · doi:10.59876/a-frqv-w82s

Contrôle de gestion et culture nationale: un essai d'adaptation dans le contexte tunisien

2008· article· en· W2488032069 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kaïs Lassoued

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement international · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal and Cross-Cultural Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)HierarchyCollectivismControl (management)SociologyWelfare economicsPolitical scienceManagementIndividualism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The issues of adaptation of management control to the social and cultural characteristics of various countries are far from being fully resolved. This is the assumption of this article in its mission to focus on national differences. This work has 3 objectives. The first is to identify the cultural foundations, coming from North American society, of management control. The second is to show how Tunisian cultural values are inadequate to the American model of management control. The third objective is to provide some guidelines for the adaptation of management control to the national culture of Tunisia. From the Tunisian cultural configuration and the information gathered through interviews, we recommend that adaptation efforts be directed to the following 3 areas: first, gradually changing perceptions while moving closer to a culture of competitiveness; then, a development of individual performance while retaining a portion of collectivism; finally, a participatory development while retaining an element of hierarchy. [PUB ABSTRACT]

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)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement internationalSame topicGlobal and Cross-Cultural ManagementFrench-language works237,207