Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study was to explore how the migration experiences of international accounting professionals were shaped by colonial structures and how, through their interactions with other professionals, migrants hybridize their professional identities and the profession in Canada. Design/methodology/approach – A post-colonial analysis of the career narratives of international accounting professionals who migrated to Canada. Findings – This paper illustrates how explicit and formal requirements for transformation, as well as the more subtle informal demands of employers and clients, require non-Western professionals to transform personal characteristics in ways that make them more “Canadian” or “professional”. Findings show that mimicry takes many forms, with some professionals becoming “consummate mimics”, while others discuss their transition in ways that highlight resistance (“reluctant mimics”) and the demands that systematically frustrate and exclude many non-Western professionals from full participation in the “global” profession in Canada (“frustrated mimics”). Research limitations/implications – This paper contributes to the existing scholarly literature on the persistence of colonial structures in shaping the experiences of colonized people even as they migrate in search of better opportunities decades after the colonial structures have been formally dismantled. It builds on Bhabha’s (1994) work illustrating that colonial structures are susceptible to change through action and interaction. We hope this study contributes to social change by providing some insights into how mimicry, resistance and hybridization may disrupt the unreflexive enactment of colonial structures that sustain inequality. Originality/value – This study extends the literature on professional migration using a postcolonial perspective to empirically examine the lived experience of the colonial encounter and professionals transition their professional identities across borders.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".