MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626155588 · doi:10.24124/2010/bpgub1463

Engaging success: a qualitative analysis of the prospective benefits of implementing gainsharing in British Columbia's pulp and paper industry

2010· dissertation· en· W2626155588 on OpenAlexaffabout
Angela Horianopoulos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCooperative Studies and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoyaltyBusinessProfitability indexProductivityMarketingRevenueProfit (economics)Industrial relationsEconomicsManagementEconomic growthAccountingFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative analysis examines the effects of gainsharing on both productivity and employee engagement in the British Columbia pulp and paper industry. The pulp and paper industry plays an important role in the provincial economy by contributing four billion dollars annually and employing over 10,000 workers in high-pay unionized jobs. However, the industry has seen a significant decline in the past ten years in the number of facilities operating, which has reduced employment and ultimately tax revenue in the province. The economic importance of the pulp and paper industry highlights the need for unions and management to work together. Management must engage the human capital of its employees in order to achieve a competitive advantage in the global market. Gainsharing is a means to increase productivity more importantly, it is a method of facilitating a cooperative relationship between unions and management. This cooperative relationship not only increases productivity, but also significantly reduces labour relations costs while promoting a sense of satisfaction, loyalty and commitment within the employees. In this project, I develop a model explicitly outlining the impact of gainsharing within the pulp and paper industry. I test the model by reviewing and summarizing existing literature. The results are strongly supportive of the positive impact of gainsharing on productivity, reduced labour relations costs, employee engagement and profitability. I present recommendations for the application for government involvement, which can contribute to the success of this process, thus contributing to the success of the pulp and paper industry. --P. 2.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Studies and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207