A spatial grammar of organising: studying the communicative constitution of organisational spaces
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article contributes to the growing body of literature on organisational spaces by taking a communication-centred approach to organising that stresses a performative view of communication as constitutive of organisation. Based on this constitutive premise, I propose to study the ‘spatial grammar of organising’, which implies (a) describing the spatial imaginary of an organisation: the spatial images that are voiced and embodied, and their effects on the production of organisational spaces; and (b) attending to the processes through which these organisational spaces are performed and to their implications. Applying these analytical steps in the study of an outreach organisation’s development strategy, the article shows that the constitution of organisational spaces is a communicative process of boundary setting in which actors of various ontologies are related. Hence, the spatial imaginary of an organisation is not abstract and neutral: it has concrete organisational and political effects in defining the organisation’s space of action.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it