Nonprofit adaptation and variation in changing contexts: The speciation of shared platform organizations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research examines the structure, organization, and evolution of the shared platform, an innovative organizational structure intended to assist the capacity concerns of small nonprofits. The grounded and exploratory inquiry of multiple participants in a shared platform organizational community in Toronto shows that there are two distinct variants of the shared platform, and that the evolution of an administrative form to a community development form of shared platform occurred through a process of field-level bricolage.Cette recherche examine la composition, l’organisation et l’évolution de la plateforme partagée, une structure organisationnelle innovatrice conçue pour aider les petites associations sans but lucratif qui se soucient de leurs limites de capacité. Cette enquête ancrée et exploratoire de participants multiples dans une communauté organisationnelle à plateforme partagée à Toronto montre qu’il y a deux variantes distinctes de la plateforme partagée, et que son évolution d’une forme « administration » vers une forme « développement communautaire » s’est effectuée par un processus de bricolage sur le terrain.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".