MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790034854 · doi:10.1080/23322373.2018.1437988

The 39 Country Initiative and Africa

2018· article· en· W2790034854 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paul W. Beamish

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrica Journal of Management · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Learning and Leadership
Canadian institutionsCentre for International Governance InnovationWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProsperityPovertyEconomic growthPolitical scienceResource (disambiguation)Development economicsBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Management education in Africa’s poorest countries suffers from the greatest resource constraints of any continent on earth. At least three major challenges exist: lack of current teaching material; very expensive books/photocopies, making an insufficient quantity of materials available; and too few qualified faculty.In 2010, the Ivey Business School at Western University in Canada established a three-pronged strategy to help improve management education in 39 of the world’s poorest countries. Of these, 32 are in Africa. The primary purpose of its approach is poverty reduction. It is premised on the belief that if managers and entrepreneurs can make more sound business decisions, failures will decline, and prosperity will increase. The viability of all three elements of the strategy has been proved in various Ivey initiatives over the past 20 years in different geographies.This article reviews the history of the 39 Country Initiative to date in relation to Africa, provides some ideas about the way forward, and some personal observations.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrica Journal of ManagementSame topicOrganizational Learning and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207