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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".