La nature stratégique des ressources issues de l’ancrage territorial : proposition d’une grille d’évaluation pour les PME
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’inscription de l’ancrage territorial (AT) dans les composantes d’une politique de RSE conduit parfois au développement d’un discours prosélyte en direction des chefs d’entreprise. Il importe que les chefs d’entreprise puissent adopter une attitude critique permettant de prendre en compte l’intérêt de l’entreprise à participer à des actions collectives. Comment analyser, du point de vue d’une PME, la nature éventuellement stratégique des ressources issues de l’AT ? Dans un premier temps, cet article analyse, de façon théorique, la capacité des ressources issues de l’AT à permettre la création d’un avantage concurrentiel durable. Une grille d’analyse s’appuyant sur le modèle VRIO de Barney est proposée. Elle met en évidence les caractéristiques des interactions entreprise/territoire sur lesquelles peut se fonder la dimension stratégique de ces ressources. Dans un second temps, quatre études de cas de PME ancrées sont menées afin de valider la capacité opérationnelle de cette grille d’analyse et de l’adapter.
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 | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".