MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895209030 · doi:10.1080/17449359.2018.1525404

Changing content and form: corporate training in Finnish retailing, 1900–1975

2018· article· en· W2895209030 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jarmo Seppälä

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement & Organizational History · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyTraining (meteorology)Quarter (Canadian coin)MarketingBusinessPublic relationsPoliticsPolitical scienceLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, I study the history of corporate training in the Finnish retail industry from the beginning to the last quarter of the 20th century. In this effort, I search for answers to questions regarding how and why retail organizations adapted their in-house educational organizations to the different pressures arising from ideologically imprinted stakeholders or external regulators and the competitive business environment. From the historical development of corporate training systems, it is possible to discern two clear dimensions that help to structure the history of the corporate training of Finnish retail organizations. The dimensions are the form (generic vs. specific) and content (ideological vs. practical) of training. During the research period, corporate training transformed from the development of means-end rational capabilities into a ‘semipublic’ educational system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.144 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement & Organizational HistorySame topicManagement and Organizational StudiesFrench-language works237,207