DEL DICHO AL HECHO: UNA DISCUSIÓN ACERCA DEL DEVENIR HISTÓRICO DE LAS TEORÍAS ADMINISTRATIVAS Y SU CORRESPONDENCIA CON LAS PRÁCTICAS EMPRESARIALES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"Este artículo se deriva de la formulación de la línea de investigación en Información, Control y Gestión en su eje de identidad epistémico-disciplinal. Se realiza una reflexión acerca de la evolución del pensamiento administrativo y para ello se efectúa un recorrido por los autores representantes de las diferentes escuelas de pensamiento administrativo: Clásicas, Neoclásica, Relaciones Humanas y Pensamiento Administrativo de Montreal, develando cómo cada una de ellas inserta el papel del ser humano en el desarrollo de las actividades empresariales y cómo éste se convierte en un aspecto clave de controversia. Finalmente, se concluye que el rescate de los valores culturales, éticos y sociales de los seres humanos no pasa de ser una retórica, que no trasciende la realidad empresarial, y se dejan algunos elementos para tratar en trabajos futuros."
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".