MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529224073 · doi:10.1111/faam.12100

New Public Management: The Story Continues

2016· article· en· W2529224073 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFinancial Accountability and Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Public sectorNew public managementPublic administrationDemiseGovernment (linguistics)Articulation (sociology)Modernization theoryPublic policyPolitical sciencePublic managementPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract New Public Management (NPM) has aroused significant interest amongst academe, policy makers and practitioners, since its first articulation in the seminal articles by Hood (1991 and 1995). However, in the 21 st century, a body of opinion has developed which asserts that the NPM is passé . This paper seeks to determine the contemporary status of NPM in the context of the UK, one of the early adopters of NPM. Close inspection of UK Government policy underlines the importance of NPM ideas in the New Labour Government modernisation policy (1997‐2010). Furthermore, the policy actions of the 2010–2015 UK Coalition Government reveal that the global financial crisis intensified the drive for NPM in the UK's public sector. This discussion reveals no evidence in support of the demise of NPM.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.294 · 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