Pouvoir d’influence des organisations d’un écosystème entrepreneurial : étude de cas de trois associations québécoises et leçons à tirer pour une initiative africaine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’invisibilisation de PME ou de TPE dans une économie mondialisée est un frein à la prospérité deces dernières. Plusieurs entrepreneures propriétaires n’ont pas les réseaux leur permettant d’influencer le contexte dans lequel elles évoluent. Cela entraîne une certaine précarité de leurs entreprises et par ricochet de leur propre situation économique. Nous faisons la démonstration par des exemples québécois qu’un cercle d’influence par la création d’un réseau d’associations d’entrepreneures, saurait rendre ces dernières visibles ainsi que leurs entreprises. Nous nous appuyons sur le potentiel d’agentivité des discours dans une approche de communication constitutive des organisations. The invisibilization of SMEs or VSEs in a globalized economy refrains their prosperity. Many women entrepreneurs do not have the networks to influence the context in which they operate. This leads to a certain precariousness of their businesses and, by extension, of their own economic situation. We demonstrate through examples from Quebec (Canada), that a circle of influence through the network of association for women entrepreneurs could make them and their businesses visible. We rely on the potential for agency of discourses under the communicative constitution of organizations approach.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".