MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048787163 · doi:10.1108/shr-06-2020-0055

Transforming human resources management in the age of Industry 4.0: a matter of survival for HR professionals

2020· article· en· W3048787163 on OpenAlexaff
Placide Poba‐Nzaou, Malatsi Galani, Anicet Tchibozo

Bibliographic record

VenueStrategic HR Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAI and HR Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityAnalyticsBusinessHuman resourcesValue (mathematics)Human resource managementResource (disambiguation)Knowledge managementPublic relationsMarketingManagementPolitical scienceEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This study aims to contribute to the old debate about the need for transformation of human resource (HR) professionals and HR services. It proposes the advent of people analytics as an unprecedented opportunity to support this transformation toward a more strategic positioning. Design/methodology/approach This paper carried out a review of the use or willingness to use analytics by HR professionals. Findings Although HR professionals have been able to transform themselves over the years from a posture largely dominated by the administrative role, to one that includes compliance, the transformation remains insufficient considering the challenges faced by organizations. The advent of the fourth industrial revolution has put people back at the center of organizations’ concerns, but HR seems to be neither equipped nor ready to seize this unprecedented opportunity to play a more strategic role. Originality/value Transforming human resource management to fit Industry 4.0 is not a necessity, but a matter of survival for HR professionals.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations25
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrategic HR ReviewSame topicAI and HR TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207