Uncovering Combinations in the Control of Local Public Services: Empirical Forms and Their Determinants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the last ten years, the management accounting literature has devoted extensive attention to control forms applied in cooperative agreements between partner organizations. While originally contributors developed a theoretical approach focused on pure control archetypes, more recently this approach was criticized because not sufficiently powerful to explain the variety of forms and trajectories that inter-organizational controls can assume. The aim of our paper is to study the possible coexistence of inter-organizational control types existing in practice and to explore their determinants. From an empirical point of view, we conducted a survey on Italian municipalities and investigated their relationships with service providers in the areas of waste management and social services. Our results show that control combinations are more multifaceted than the theoretical configurations presented in the literature, and that in practice while some mechanisms related to certain archetypes are found in some combinations and not in others, some other mechanisms are common to all patterns. In addition, our evidence shows a composite framework where task characteristics come together with specific party characteristics and institutional factors to explain controls portfolios.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".