Le coaching en entreprise, avatar d’un nouveau malaise dans les organisations ? Le cas de l’épuisement professionnel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La fin du siècle dernier a vu l’émergence du thème de la souffrance au travail, qui ne manque pas d’interpeller. En particulier, le syndrome d’épuisement professionnel retient toute l’attention en raison de sa singularité. Une ambition, dès lors, peut être de comprendre de quoi ce syndrome est le symptôme. Cela conduit à interroger un tel phénomène en le replaçant dans le contexte d’une évolution civilisationnelle et anthropologique majeure impactant le lien social et qu’exploiterait l’organisation contemporaine du travail. Dans cette perspective, à l’articulation de la psychanalyse et de la psychosociologie des organisations, l’auteur formule une critique des nouveaux outils du management, au titre desquels le coaching, considéré comme un instrument de développement personnel connaissant un fort succès en entreprise, serait à considérer comme une technique de gestion de la psyché qui, loin de préserver le sujet de l’épuisement, pourrait au contraire contribuer à le favoriser.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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".