MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W105575439

The Question Concerning Empowerment: Subjects of the Enterprise or Enterprising Subjects?

2006· article· en· W105575439 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicERP Systems Implementation and Impact
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentControl (management)Subject (documents)Knowledge managementPublic relationsSociologyEpistemologyPsychologyPolitical scienceManagementComputer scienceEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enterprise Systems (ES), historically justified as means of control, are paradoxically also becoming integral to empowerment.Some researchers suggest that achieving the right balance between control and empowerment is a key challenge for today' s organizations.Others argue that such simple dichotomous conceptualizations fail to account for the co-existence in practice of a high degree of control and empowerment.To account for these seemingly paradoxical effects, we argue that empowerment does not result from the relaxation of organizational controls over particular functions but rather from the application of techniques of control, including the ES, aimed at shaping employee identities in accordance with organizational goals and desires.Understanding control as intrinsic and not separate from empowerment, we suggest that the empowered employee is not merely a subject of the enterprise but more so continually constructed as an enterprising subject.We discuss implications for theorizing the role of ES in empowerment initiatives.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.256 · 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