Business in society or an integrated vision of governance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Corporate governance is more than disciplining managers to produce more value for the shareholders. It must include how the organization influences other social institutions in order to impose its view or legitimize its procedures. The purpose of this paper is to give the concept of governance its full meaning. Design/methodology/approach This paper describes some of the essential networks between the corporation, as an organization, and other social institutions. It also tries to separate the level at which these networks function, while proposing some categories to understand the specificity of the organization in regard to individuals or the society all included in a discussion of the managerialism. Findings The paper considers the other side of the institutional theory, showing that the enterprise is, at least, influencing the functioning of the society, as much as the society influences the enterprise. However, in this period still dominated by the agency theory, this kind of analysis had not been developed very much yet. Originality/value This paper situated itself in the scotoma of the theories customarily used in accounting or management. These theories are interested to present the enterprise as passively supporting the weight of social pressures. The paper's originality is to focus on what is habitually left in the blind spot of those theories using works that have a best audience in political sciences than in management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".