Entreprise, Développement durable et théorie des parties prenantes : esquisse d'un arrimage socio-constructionniste
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problems of Sustainable Development (SD) raise new theoretical challenges for management research. It introduces an original type of uncertainty, whose nature is not only economic and managerial, but also socio-technical. It thus throws the business firm into unprecedented decision-making contexts, marked by complexity, the multiplicity of interdependent stakeholders, and the presence of often paralyzing controversy. Stakeholder Theory (ST) offers a useful but incomplete solution to reflect this reality. To overcome its limitations, it must be recast into a process and "socio-centered" perspective. To that end, we suggest to ground it in the recent developments of socio-constructionism, laying the foundations for an enriched conceptualization of management based on the interactive construction of negotiated orders. This revised analytical framework makes it now possible to assess how the spaces of action available to business firms get constructed in their interactions with their stakeholders, and to determine the contexts and logics of action favorable to an effective integration of SD into business strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".