MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205866792 · doi:10.7202/1083977ar

Analyse comparée de deux stratégies de développement du leadership authentique dans une perspective de développement durable

2021· article· fr· W4205866792 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhronesis · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La mise en oeuvre des objectifs de développement durable force les dirigeants des organisations à développer des capacités cognitives et comportementales pour gérer la complexité qui en découle. Ces capacités peuvent être associées au leadership authentique. Les approches réflexives sont reconnues comme étant prometteuses pour développer ce type de leadership. Elles sont toutefois peu utilisées en contexte de formation universitaire. Cet article compare deux approches d’apprentissage qui visent le développement du leadership chez des étudiants de niveau maîtrise. Il en ressort que l’apprentissage expérientiel par jeux d’actions collaboratifs contribuerait à développer davantage certaines composantes du leadership authentique que le coaching.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.643
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.279
Teacher spread0.236 · 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