MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2226500016 · doi:10.59876/a-dca0-bqej

Entrepreneuriat institutionnel et apprentissages collectifs. Le cas de la Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)

2008· article· en· W2226500016 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aurélien Acquier, Franck Aggeri

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement international · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutionalisationEntrepreneurshipInstitutional analysisField (mathematics)Political scienceInstitutional changeNeglectProcess (computing)Institutional theoryOrder (exchange)SociologyKnowledge managementRegional sciencePublic administrationBusinessSocial sciencePsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Institutional entrepreneurship appears as a promising concept to explain the emergence of new institutions or new institutional fields. However, institutional entrepreneurship tends to neglect the role of knowledge dynamics and of the concrete devices that support the development of new institutions. In order to integrate knowledge dynamics in neoinstitutional analysis, we study the institutionalization of the emerging field of sustainable reporting by providing a detailed historical analysis of a central device: the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). Two propositions can be drawn from our analysis. First, we propose that in emerging fields, where knowledge is lacking, institutional entrepreneurship is more distributed, cooperative and enabling than what the traditional imagery suggests. Second, institutional entrepreneurship is only a first stage in a broader process of institutionalization.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement internationalSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207