MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156610810 · doi:10.1002/bse.2788

Does quality management improve the internalization of environmental practices? An empirical study in Africa

2021· article· en· W3156610810 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness Strategy and the Environment · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Management Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandardizationBureaucracyQuality (philosophy)BusinessQuality managementEnvironmental resource managementSustainable developmentEnvironmental qualityQuality management systemAccountingProcess managementPolitical scienceEconomicsMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article analyzes the role of quality management in the internalization of environmental practices. A qualitative study based on interviews with 35 practitioners was conducted in three African countries (Cameroon, Senegal, and Ivory Coast). The results highlight the contrasting roles played by the main reference model for quality management—International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9001—in the internalization of the international standard for corporate environmental management—ISO 14001—with positive points related to formal and documentary aspects and perverse effects such as increased bureaucracy and a focus on quality at the expense of the environment. The results also point to four configurations of integration of environmental practices according to the level of quality management internalization and the level of institutional pressure to adopt corporate environmental management: poor integration, partial integration, substantial integration, and sustainable integration.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.245 · 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