Collective Representation and Citizenship at Work in a Project Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is part of a broader effort to take a fresh look at citizenship at work in the contemporary world of work. The authors draw on Bosniak’s social theory of citizenship to study two groups of workers (videogame developers and performance artists) whose occupations embody similar characteristics: knowledge work which is highly qualified, mobile and organized by project. With knowledge work growing in importance in developed countries, we must account for the fact that the knowledge worker is not the same economically dependent subject as the industrial citizen, whose skills were easily replaceable. While industrial organizations are built on dividing the conception and execution of work, knowledge work mobilizes the whole of the worker, rather than mobilizing only his/her manpower, in a creative process of innovation that takes place in a very competitive labour market where the creative contribution of the worker is a decisive asset.The authors study the contemporary representation gap among knowledge workers and the ways they participate in the regulation of their work, both locally and on a social scale. They draw on two case studies of project-based environments where highly qualified workers are constantly swapping fixed-term contracts, instead of enjoying stable open-ended contracts. Faced with collective problems and issues, they develop original means to participate in regulating their work that do not involve unions. Discussion of findings highlights the emergence not only of new modes of representation, but also of a new citizen at work, who is seeking different rights and benefits than those of the industrial citizen of the Fordist era and, furthermore, in an area that goes beyond that of the employer organization.
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 | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".