Розвиток процесів моніторингу виконання програм при стейкхолдер - орієнтованому управлінню ресурсним забезпеченням
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accounting for the influence of stakeholders on human resource management processes enhances a program's feasibility and ensures the sustainable development of management processes. The object of this research is the resource management processes within programs. The research subject is the models, methods, and processes of stakeholder-oriented management of program resource provisioning. The study aims to develop a set of models for stakeholder-oriented management of program resource provisioning. The paper addresses the following tasks: to develop a conceptual model of stakeholder-oriented management of program resource provisioning; to develop an aggregated model of stakeholder-oriented management of program resource provisioning; and to simulate the process of stakeholder-oriented formulation of resource requirements for programs. The research methodology is based on applying process-based, project-based, and program-based approaches to management, combinatorial analysis, and a configuration-based approach to solving the problem of resource allocation in a multi-project environment. The results of the study include the development of a set of models for stakeholder-oriented management of program resource provisioning, namely: a conceptual model of stakeholder-oriented management of program resource provisioning; an aggregated model of stakeholder-oriented management of program resource provisioning; and a model of the process for stakeholder-oriented formulation of program resource requirements. The scientific novelty of the proposed results lies in developing a set of models whose application will contribute to advancing resource provisioning management processes in programs. The stakeholder-oriented management of program resource provisioning was modelled. The application of the developed models was considered using a test case. Conclusions: the developed stakeholder-oriented models for managing program resource provisioning enable the formalization of the resource management process while considering the requirements for both project and program team composition. The generation of resource provisioning configurations allows for selecting an option that meets requirements regarding functionality, redundancy, cost, composition, and redistributive capability. For the given example, the cost of implementing configurations was reduced by a factor of 1.06-1.24. The number of resource allocation options within the program ranges from 18 to 46,230, allowing the selection of a configuration that enables resource redistribution among program projects based on a donor–acceptor interaction model without additional resources. A promising direction for future research is developing an information system for managing program resource provisioning.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".