Bibliographic record
Abstract
La conduite de grands projets de technologie de l'information en général, et d'implantation de progiciels intégrés en particulier, comporte souvent éléments de risque important pour les organisations. Ainsi en était-il pour le projet Harmonie de Hydro-Québec, nom donné au projet d'implantation du progiciel R/3 de SAP en support aux processus de gestion des ressources humaines, matérielles et financières. Les éléments de risque du projet étaient principalement reliés à son envergure, à la nouveauté et à la complexité technologiques, à l'ampleur des changements et aux exigences d'un échéancier serré. Ce texte décrit la gestion du projet Harmonie, d'une part en présentant les principaux mécanismes mis en place par la direction de Hydro-Québec pour en assurer le succès et d'autre part en décrivant certains des principaux outils de gestion adoptés par Serge Piotte, directeur du projet Harmonie, et en présentant les principes d'exercice du leadership qui l'ont guidé tout au long du projet.
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 | 0.012 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.119 | 0.039 |
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".