MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2406277401 · doi:10.1057/jit.2015.24

Exploring the effects of liminality on corporate social responsibility in inter-firm outsourcing relationships

2015· article· en· W2406277401 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOutsourcing and Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersUniversity College Dublin
KeywordsLiminalityCommunitasOutsourcingDivestmentContext (archaeology)BusinessInsourcingSociologyPublic relationsMarketingPolitical scienceAnthropologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article draws on the evidence gathered from a corporate social responsibility (CSR) research project in the area of global information technology (IT) outsourcing to examine the impact of liminality. IT outsourcing offers a novel context to study this phenomena, as it operates across the boundaries of both firm and country. The case study focuses on the specific project of a school in India, as the liminal space found ‘betwixt and between’ the client and provider of IT outsourcing services. Three stages of liminality are identified: separation (divestiture), transition (liminality) and incorporation (investiture); through the interpretive analysis of the empirical material. The construct of communitas is proposed for analysing the impact of liminality on the relationship between an outsourcing client and the provider. The understanding of liminality and communitas has both theoretical and practical implications, and contributes to the understanding of relationships and the wider role of CSR in global IT outsourcing.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.153 · 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