Offshoring, exit and voice: implications for organizational theory and practice
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
Purpose This paper seeks to explore the impact of corporate offshoring moves on the economic and psychological contracts between firms and their employees. Design/methodology/approach The paper draws upon literature from diverse social sciences to explore the phenomena of social contracts and offshoring. Especially deploying the exit‐voice theory of Alfred Hirschman, it is argued here that offshoring decreases the regenerative power promised both by exit and voice in helping organizations recover from decline. Findings Organizational systems and processes designed to deal with the “post‐offshoring worker” only serve to accentuate the sense of alienation felt by workers at the way they are regarded. This scenario poses a serious challenge to researchers and practitioners who need to make sense of these effects and deal with them accordingly. Originality/value This paper highlights, honors and legitimates everyday relations at the workplace on both sides of the offshoring divide, as sites of class struggle, of worker alienation, of intra‐organizational bargaining and, sometimes, of relations of imperialism and cultural dislocation. Understanding the complexity of this context and managing the actions arising out of this are important challenges facing the managers.
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 | 0.013 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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