MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321795249 · doi:10.4236/jhrss.2023.111003

Interplay of Strategic and Institutional Factors in the Process of Transfer of Human Resource Management Practices in MNCs

2023· article· en· W4321795249 on OpenAlexaff
Igor Volkov, Benoît Cherré

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinational corporationSubsidiaryHuman resource managementKnowledge transferBusinessKnowledge managementProcess (computing)Adaptation (eye)Resource (disambiguation)Function (biology)StandardizationProcess managementIndustrial organizationPolitical scienceComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current research on international human resource management (HRM) is structured around the issue of global standardization versus the local adaptation of HRM practices. Numerous studies tended to adopt either an institutional or a strategic perspective. This article examines the interaction between these two groups of factors when MNCs transfer HRM knowledge from their HQ to foreign subsidiaries. The integrative theoretical framework proposed and empirically validated at three MNCs suggests that the choice of the knowledge to be transferred and transfer mechanisms is determined by both institutional and strategic variables. Moreover, the effectiveness of the transfer mainly depends mainly on organizational strategy and the role of HR function in this process.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Human Resource and Sustainability StudiesSame topicManagement and Organizational PracticesFrench-language works237,207