Le management et la mobilisation des travailleurs : de l’illusio aux désillusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette contribution s’intéresse à l’investissement au travail et aux désillusions qui en découlent. À partir d’une enquête menée au sein d’une entreprise, le texte essaye de rendre compte des raisons objectives et subjectives qui poussent les travailleurs à s’investir subjectivement dans une coopération objective avec les intérêts de leurs employeurs au-delà de la rationalité spécifique à leur travail. Il montre que l’analyse des contraintes économiques et celle des stratégies patronales ne suffisent pas à comprendre cet investissement. Il faut aussi se placer du côté des travailleurs pour comprendre leur croyance dans leur jeu et les enjeux et les processus qui mènent à leur adhésion. Le concept d’illusio, concept relationnel forgé par Pierre Bourdieu, permet de comprendre cette dynamique qui s’instaure entre les travailleurs et leur espace d’appartenance.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".