Are the Organizations Prepared for a Real Efficacy of the Socail and Collective Development? A Critical Reflexion in a Latin American Context
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
In the context of the present, most organizations are developing towards a so‐called efficacy proposed by a world of economic and scientific predominance. As a consequence, organizations have become the target of insignificant actions by human beings, reducing the individuals to automatons. It is necessary to rescue the real nature of organizations and to make changes inside them, in order to attend to the individual diversity and the needs of the community. Thus, only a reflexive and critical look at the articulation of tangible things may help us. Certainly, those are the intentions of our paper, when we propose actions to reach a relation between the individuals and the organizations, using elements extracted from theoretical currents whose authors analyze those subjects as recurrent ones (structuralism, critical theory and post‐modernism). Initially, the paper makes a reflection on the nature of current organizational reality and the theoretical basis often present nowadays. Hereby, we present some propositions and put in question our responsibility as students, professors, researchers and managers, for having in our hands the power to decide if we want continuity or change. Finally, we propose some methodological guidelines for research oriented to elucidate the reality of the reflections afore mentioned. Hence, we argue the need to conduct critical‐action research, by illustrating and questioning the social responsibility of one type of Latin‐American company, petroleum companies, for which we show the social‐environmental impacts of their strategic decisions. Our critical reflections and propositions come from two sources: one is our biographical experience from almost twelve years in Latin‐American countries, either as managers or professors, and the second one is some results of our current research interest regarding social responsibility in the themes of equity and organizational objectives.
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 | 0.007 | 0.070 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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