The Question Concerning Empowerment: Subjects of the Enterprise or Enterprising Subjects?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.052 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".