Inter-organizational collaboration: A study of the Ontario Healthy Babies/Healthy Children Program.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored mandatory collaboration in the Healthy Babies/Healthy Children (HBHC) Program in Ontario. The inter-organizational and collaboration literature was reviewed to develop a conceptual framework for the study which included: (1) environmental pre-conditions, (2) organizational structures and (3) operational processes that facilitate or constrain local collaboration in the HBHC networks. An exploratory qualitative design was used to explore three main research questions: (1) What environmental pre-conditions facilitate or constrain local collaboration in the Ontario Healthy Babies/Healthy Children Program? (2) What organizational structures facilitate or constrain local collaboration in the Ontario Healthy Babies/Healthy Children Program? (3) What operational processes facilitate or constrain local collaboration in the Ontario Healthy Babies/Healthy Children Program? The conceptual framework developed from the literature guided the research and formed the basis of the interview guide for HBHC Program Managers. A sample of fourteen managers were interviewed to gather their perceptions of mandatory collaboration in the HBHC collaborative networks in Ontario. The responses to these interviews were analyzed using qualitative content analysis to conduct a thematic analysis of the data. The findings were then compared to the theoretical literature on environmental pre-conditions, organizational structures and operational processes. The findings supported existing literature that suggests environmental preconditions, organizational structures and operational processes are important influences that facilitate and constrain collaboration. Emergent dimensions of collaboration that warrant further exploration were also identified in the data. This study found that collaboration was an organizing mechanism well suited to community social work practice. Further, the data suggests that collaborative practice skills are critical for mediating and negotiating mandatory reforms in health and human service delivery systems. Recommendations for community social work practice with collaborative networks were also presented. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2004 .P555. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 44-03, page: 1234. Thesis (M.S.W.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2005.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".