MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096892519

Riding the wrong wave: Organizational failure as a failed turnaround. Long Range Planning 38

2005· article· en· W7096892519 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Insolvency and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconPerspective (graphical)Sequence (biology)Position (finance)Virtuous circle and vicious circle
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes that a failing organization goes through a sequence of four stages before finally landing in the morass of death. A four-stage model is proposed to describe this journey, which can lead to failure or to turnaround. By categorizing the elements of failure or turnaround, the model explains how the elements germane to each stage, when combined, facilitate the progression of an organization from crippling deterioration in performance to eventual death or to re-stabilizing survival. To support our contention, we focus on the Canadian retail industry, and specifically on the story of the once very successful but now extinct merchandising icon T. Eaton Co. Ltd., contrasting its fortunes with those of fellow Canadian retail survivors Hudson’s Bay Company and Canadian Tire. 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved The current rage for courses of study in North American universities is crime scene investigation. Based on the popular U.S. TV show CSI (Crime Scene Investigation), students are applying in vast numbers to study forensics, and a number of schools that do not offer this course of study are working on developing it.1 It seems that people are far more willing to study the rather squeamish matter of vicious crime and even murder than to look at the somewhat

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.051
Scholarly communication0.0150.013
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCorporate Insolvency and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207