Evolution and Issue Patterns for Major-Sport-Event Organizing Committees and Their Stakeholders
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to develop a framework of how organizing committees operationally evolve and the types of issues with which they and their stakeholders must deal. Based on a combination of stakeholder theory and issues management, a case study of the 1999 Pan American Games held in Winnipeg, Canada, was built using archival material and interviews. Three major organizing-committee operational modes emerged: planning, implementation, and wrap-up. Issue categories faced by the organizing committee and its stakeholders included politics, visibility, financial, organizing, relationships, operations, sport, infrastructure, human resources, media, interdependence, participation, and legacy. Issue-category prominence depended on the operational mode and organizing-committee member hierarchical level, such that issues became less strategic and broad as one moved through operational modes or down the hierarchy. Issue categories also differed within stakeholder groups, whereas stakeholder interests (material, political, affiliative, informational, and symbolic) differed between stakeholder groups.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it