MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142133535 · doi:10.1177/0950017012460315

Controlling the uncontrollable: ‘Agile’ teams and illusions of autonomy in creative work

2013· article· en· W2142133535 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueWork Employment and Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgile software developmentAutonomyCreativityContext (archaeology)StudioCoachingWork (physics)EmpowermentControl (management)Public relationsKnowledge managementSociologyBusinessManagementPolitical scienceEngineeringPsychologyComputer scienceSocial psychologyEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The creative industries have recently been hailed as presenting a liberating model for the future of work and a valuable terrain on which to examine purported new regimes of workplace control. This article, based on the empirical examination of a Canadian video game development studio, traces the modes of control which operate on and through project teams in creative settings. The impact of the adoption of an ‘emancipatory’, post-bureaucratic project management technology, ‘Agile’, is critically examined through interviews and non-participative observation of management, technical and artistic labour within one project team. The potential for autonomy in such ‘Agile’ teams is critically assessed within the managerial regime of creative production and the broader power relations implied by the financial, organizational and institutional context.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.263 · 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