MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4375862355 · doi:10.1522/revueot.v32n1.1556

Hybridation salariat-entrepreneuriat au Burkina Faso : motivations et stratégies de conciliation entre emploi salarié et activité entrepreneuriale

2023· article· fr· W4375862355 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hamidine Illa, Attianbou Bienvenu Binger Beyiran

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Organisations & territoires · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La recherche vise à analyser les motivations ainsi que les stratégies de conciliation de l’emploi salarié et de l’activité entrepreneuriale au Burkina Faso. Sur la base de 20 entretiens semi-directifs réalisés avec des entrepreneurs hybrides de ce pays de l’Afrique de l’Ouest, les résultats font ressortir des motivations entrepreneuriales mixtes à caractères économiques et non économiques, mais également dépendantes du contexte socio-culturel. Par ailleurs, les entrepreneurs hybrides tentent de concilier leur double rôle d’employé-entrepreneur en déléguant la gestion courante de l’entreprise à un personnel diversifié, tout en contrôlant les activités à distance au moyen d’outils numériques. La recherche met en évidence deux facteurs clés de pérennisation de l’entreprise créée jusqu’ici ignorés dans la littérature, à savoir la présence physique et la contribution mentale de l’entrepreneur hybride. En outre, cette recherche suggère aux pouvoirs publics de soutenir l’entrepreneuriat hybride au regard de sa contribution à l’amélioration du pouvoir d’achat des individus et de sa capacité de création d’emplois.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue Organisations & territoires→Same topicSocial Sciences and Governance→French-language works237,207→