Administrative styles and the Iimits of administrative reform: A neo‐institutional analysis of administrative cuIture
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
Abstract: Students of organizational behaviour have always been concerned with understanding the manner in which complex organizations ‐ including systems of public administration ‐ tend to create distinctive organizational cultures and the impact these cultures have on their activities and outputs, including their prospects for reform. Recently, neo‐institutional accounts of social and political life have provided a new entry point to the analysis of administrative cultures and administrative reform. For neo‐institutionalists, the institutional structure of an organization creates a distinct pattern of constraints and incentives for state and societal actors that define and structure actors' interests and channel their behaviour. The interaction of these actors generates a particular administrative logic and process, or “culture.” However, since institutional structures vary, a neo‐institutional perspective suggests that there will be many different kinds of relatively long‐lasting patterns of administrative behaviour, each pattern being defined by the particular set of formal and informal institutions, rules, norms, traditions and values, and many different factors affecting the construction and deconstruction of each pattern. Following this neo‐institutional logic, this article develops a multilevel, “nested” model of administrative styles and applies it to patterns of convergence and divergence in administrative reform in many jurisdictions over the past several decades. Sommaire: Les étudiants en comportement organisationnel ont toujours été soucieux de comprendre la manière dont les organismes complexes ‐ y compris les systèmes d'administration publique ‐ ont tendance à créer des cultures organisationnelles par‐ticulières et l'impact qu'ont ces cultures sur leurs activités et résultats, y compris leurs perspectives de réformes. Récemment, les comptes rendus néo‐institutionnels de la vie sociale et politique ont foumi une nouvelle ouverture à l'analyse des cultures et de la réforme administratives. Pour les néo‐institutionnalistes, la structure institutionnelle d'un organisme crée un modèle distinct de contraintes et d'encoura‐gements pour les acteurs de la société et de 1'État qui définissent et structurent les interéts des acteurs et canalisent leur comportement. Linteraction de ces acteurs génère une logique et un processus administratifs particuliers, que l'on appelle °Culture.Cependant, comme les structures institutionnelles varient, une perspective néo‐institutionnelle laisse entendre qu'il y aura de nombreuses sortes de modèles de comportement administratif relativement durables: chaque modèle est défini par I'ensemble particulier d'institutions, de règles, de normes, de traditions et de valeurs formelles et informelles qui le composent, ainsi que de nombreux dif‐férents facteurs influant sur la construction et la déconstruction de chaque modèle. En suivant cette logique néo‐institutionnelle, le présent article élabore un modèle de styles administratifs à diffbrents niveaux et I'applique aux modéles de convergence et de divergence en réforme administrative dans de nombreuses juridictions au cours des demiéres décennies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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