Theorising the Concept of Organisational Artefacts: How It Enhances the Development of Corporate/Organisational Identity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organisational artefacts are materials, buildings, symbols, names, images, logos, catchwords that make sense to all the stakeholders of an organisation; they therefore have meanings and do not just exist. Artefacts demonstrate the culture, norms and values of those who are in the organisation as well as all its stakeholders. In a nutshell it is a medium of communication within the members of the organisation and those outside the organisation; it makes enormous statements. This paper employing the descriptive/historical approach will examine the impacts of organisational artefacts on business organisations including how it helps in the development of a corporate identity in the organisations. This is more so as an organisation’s identity –expressed partly through organisational artefacts- goes directly to the heart of the existence of the organisation. The study concludes that directly and indirectly, knowingly and unknowingly, organisational artefacts enhance the development of corporate identity.
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 | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".