MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288064382 · doi:10.7202/1088434ar

To Stay or to Leave? The Views of Managers and Consultants in Management Consulting Sector

2022· article· en· W4288064382 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Caroline Tillou, Akram Al Ariss

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement international · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicHuman Resource and Talent Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbivalenceInterpersonal communicationBusinessContext (archaeology)Exploratory researchPublic relationsEmployee retentionInformation technology consultingProfessional servicesPopulationRetention ManagementMarketingKnowledge managementPsychologySocial psychologySociologyPolitical scienceInformation system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Retaining knowledge workers is of foremost interest to both academics and managers. This article conducts a deep analysis identifying prevailing HR retention practices and linking them to the AMO framework, which represents employees’ needs in terms of abilities, motivation, and opportunities for future retention. This exploratory research relied on the contributions of managers and employees from 17 French management consulting firms. The findings show the role of interpersonal internal and external relationships in times of retention of this population. This research elucidates how the ambivalence of consultants-customers’ relationships can be either facilitating or binding in such context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement internationalSame topicHuman Resource and Talent ManagementFrench-language works237,207