MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016628597 · doi:10.1177/0308275x13519272

Shame and discipline: The practice and discourse of a “Confucian model” of management in a family firm in China

2014· article· en· W2016628597 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jianhua Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueCritique of Anthropology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChina's Socioeconomic Reforms and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsCapitalismChinaSociologyGlobalizationNeoliberalism (international relations)Political economyEconomic systemPolitical scienceEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the height of economic globalization since the 1990s, neoliberal capitalism has been declared as the only game in town. Against the spread of the neoliberal capitalism from the West to the rest of the world is a growing trend of various local forms of capitalist practices or “spiritual economies.” Using the framework of global assemblage, this article examines how a “Confucian model” of management is put to practice in a self-acknowledged family firm in eastern Zhejiang, China. While the firm’s “Confucian model” of management contains a neoliberal logic of aiming at creating a more disciplined, ethical, and productive workforce, I argue that it is not an example of neoliberal capitalism. Moreover, I argue that the model is not an application of the earlier concept of Confucian capitalism engendered in other parts of Asia. Instead, it is a unique local assemblage consisting of three overlapping but heterogeneous components.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0240.038
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.344 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritique of AnthropologySame topicChina's Socioeconomic Reforms and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207