MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088839272 · doi:10.1177/1056492607310983

Acting at Work

2008· article· en· W2088839272 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

VenueJournal of Management Inquiry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsAthabasca UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConformityValue (mathematics)Exploratory researchSociologySocial psychologyWork (physics)PsychologyOrder (exchange)Public relationsPolitical scienceSocial scienceBusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Façades of conformity (FOC) is a theoretical concept coined to describe employees who act as if they embrace an organization's values when they really don't in order to survive and/or succeed within that organization. This exploratory study combines value theory and the sociology of the professions to explore manifestations of FOC among professionals (university faculty members). Respondents' experiences of “acting at work” reveal the presence, absence, and dynamic nature of FOC. Response patterns allow us to confirm, disconfirm, and extend Hewlin's (2003) theory by identifying two types of FOC, four issues respondents typically “façade” about, behaviors enacted during the use of FOC, and the perceived risks associated with not using FOC at work. These results have significant implications for the scholarly and managerial practice of assessing value congruence between individuals and organizations.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.353
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.190 · 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