Déterminants de la performance des projets de recherche et développement (R&D) des centres de liaison et de transfert (CLT) du Québec : cas du Centre québécois de recherche et de développement de l’aluminium (CQRDA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La présente thèse s’est fixée comme principal objectif de contribuer au développement des connaissances théoriques et à la bonification des pratiques en management de projets de R&D au niveau des centres de liaison et de transfert (CLT) du Québec. En faisant état d’une dualité évidente entre la dimension intangible de la gestion des connaissances et celle concrète de leur valorisation au niveau des CLT, cette étude a jeté un regard critique sur les pratiques d’évaluation sans fondements analytiques rigoureux dans le secteur public. Un large survol de l’évolution et du développement du management des projets de R&D a permis de mettre en exergue l’apport des modèles de management de projet de R&D, qui, en dépit de leur contribution significative, n’ont pas facilité le cadrage de la performance d’un projet de R&D. Une revue de l’ensemble des approches classiques et critiques nous a orienté vers une approche contingente et multicritères de la performance. L’étude s’est articulée autour de la question principale: Quels sont les déterminants de la performance des projets de R&D dans un cadre partenarial CQRDA/Entreprise? Traiter cette question suggère de procéder à une revue des différents modèles traitant de l’évaluation de la performance d’un projet de R&D à travers la littérature scientifique, mais aussi dans la pratique. Cet exercice nous a permis de proposer un modèle pertinent prenant en compte un nombre significatif d’indicateurs susceptibles de circonscrire la performance d’un projet de R&D dans un cadre partenarial CQRDA/Entreprise. À partir de ces indicateurs, il nous est possible d’apprécier la performance économique, sociale, éthique et environnementale issue des projets de R&D des PME partenaires du CQRDA. Cette appréciation a facilité l’identification des facteurs les plus déterminants de la performance d’un projet de R&D comme le management de projet au travers des critères de « respect du planning », de la « communication entre les parties prenantes du projet », de « l’utilisation rationnelle et efficiente des ressources du projet » et la « satisfaction de la clientèle ». Également, la variable Time to Market est analysée comme déterminant dans ses dimensions « temps de mise en marché » et « intégration des connaissances externes ». \n \nThe main objective of this thesis is to contribute to the development of a theoretical knowledge and the improvement of practices in the management of R&D projects at the level of liaison and transfer centers (LTC) in Quebec. By pointing to an obvious duality between the intangible dimension of knowledge management and the concrete dimension of their valuation at the LTC level, this study has critically examined evaluation practices without rigorous analytical foundations in the public sector. A broad overview of the evolution and development of the management of R&D projects highlighted the contribution of R&D project management models, which, despite their significant contribution, did not ease the framing of the performance of an R&D project. As a result, a review of all the classical and critical approaches has oriented us towards a contingent and multi-criteria approach to performance. The study focused on this main question: what are the determinants of the R&D project’s performance in a CQRDA/Enterprise partnership framework? Analyzing this question suggests a review of the different models dealing with the evaluation of the performance of an R&D project through the scientific literature but also in practice. This exercise allowed us to propose a relevant model taking into account a significant number of indicators likely to limit the performance of R&D project within a partnership framework CQRDA/Enterprise. Based on these indicators, it will be possible to assess the economic, social, ethical and environmental performance of the R&D projects of the CQRDA's SME partners. This assessment revealed the most decisive factors in the performance of an R&D project, such as project management, through criteria for ‘’respecting planning’’, ‘’communication between project stakeholders’’, ‘’rational and efficient use of project resources’’, ‘’customer satisfaction’’. In addition, Time to Marker is analyzed as determinant in its domains of ‘’time for the launch of the new product’’ and ‘’integration of external knowledge’’
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 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 teacher head, 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".