MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061092278 · doi:10.1177/0007650307305371

Institutional Determinism and Political Strategies

2007· article· en· W2061092278 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness & Society · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPolitical Influence and Corporate Strategies
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsAccommodationSample (material)Set (abstract data type)Government (linguistics)Institutional theoryConceptual frameworkPositive economicsEconomic systemBusinessEconomicsPublic economicsPolitical sciencePolitical economySociologySocial sciencePsychologyManagementLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article offers a rare study of the content and performance of political strategies in China’s highly institutionalized setting. A conceptual framework based on institutional theory findings is proposed to develop a set of expected political behavior. This is then confronted to data from a convenient sample of 233 firms. The results show that there are indeed recognizable patterns of political strategy, most of which are bent by the strong institutional environment toward accommodation rather than confrontation or defiance. The strategies identified were found to be related to the nature of the firms’ available resources and to the firms’ ability to extract benefits or bend the government’s behavior in their favor.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.235 · 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