Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper seeks to provide insights into the current global financial crisis from an institutional theory perspective. Design/methodology/approach The paper presents the development of key concepts using institutional theory, grounded in a discussion of the context of the current global financial crisis. Findings The interplay of financial industry organizations and formal and informal institutions is key to understanding the creation of the crisis. Research limitations/implications The treatment is brief but serves to provoke further research on the global financial crisis through applying and extending new institutional theory. Practical implications Fundamental aspects of the crisis need to be understood with respect to the organizational‐institutional interplay involving the financial industry. This would help to reveal the general pattern of such crises and also point towards what needs to be taken into account for potential solutions. Originality/value The paper has value for researchers as it opens up a discussion of the current crisis from an institutional theory perspective. Fresh concepts introduced here could be extended further and inform institutional theory in general. The paper has value for policy makers and practitioners in helping them understand the fundamentals of the organizational‐institutional interplay underlying the current crisis.
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 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".