Recognizing citizens in municipal management: an exploratory study based on a content analysis of municipal websites in the province of Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the usefulness of a recognition framework for the study of the relationship between municipal administrations and citizens. Within the organizational science literature, employee recognition has been shown to enhance their commitment to their organization. In a context where public authorities consistently seek to improve levels of civic engagement, could this conclusion be applied to the relationship between municipalities and their constituents? Following a review of the literature, we present the results of a content analysis of the websites of Quebec municipalities whose populations are greater than 20,000. Three modes of recognition are identified: personalized attention, value confirmation, and gratitude. Recognition practices are also found to vary between municipalities. Our study opens new pragmatic and theoretical horizons in the area of municipal management. Points for practitioners Managers know that showing recognition toward their employees is not only a sign of respect, but a means to mobilize employee commitment to their organization. This article explores the value of this finding for the field of municipal management and, specifically, to the study of the relationship between municipal managers and citizens. Should serving citizens not ultimately mean recognizing their individual identities, civic capacities, and contribution to their community’s vitality?
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".