TRANS-DISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT AND PARTNERING TO BETTER COLLABORATE AND INNOVATE IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the beginning of a project, each stakeholder starts with financial capital as well as with a capital of energy and enthusiasm. However, the lack of collaboration both within and outside of participant organizations often consumes parts of these vital resources. Furthermore, given mounting international competition, constrained government budgets, and the rapidity of technological and societal changes, project managers today are constantly called upon to find ways to do more and achieve better results with fewer resources. As a result of these trends, the project management team in the international context is faced with the need to collaborate more efficiently with professionals and stakeholders, and innovate continually throughout a project. Based on the successful management and realization of several large-scale construction, infrastructure, and urban design projects in Montreal, several factors were identified which promote collaboration and innovation: a common threat, outside competition, common values and objectives, transparent communication, and adequate organizational structures. In order to create the conditions for collaboration and innovation, two approaches were particularly successful: 1) the transdisciplinary approach, which is based on the involvement of and transparent communication between key actors from the early stages of a project until its delivery, and 2) the prevention of conflicts through partnering. These observations, in turn, point to the necessity for a new kind of leadership in project management based more on emotional intelligence than on technical skill.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".