Accounting change in the Scottish and Westminster central governments: A study of voice and legitimation
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
Abstract Organisational voice processes are crucial during change. These will affect actors’ individual understanding of change and the way in which change is perceived and legitimated generally. Looking at accounting changes at two government levels (Westminster and Scotland), this paper explores relationships between organisational voice processes during change (exploring these in terms of horizontal/vertical and promotive/prohibitive dimensions) and legitimation strategies subsequently used by the actors involved. In Westminster, where promotive vertical voicing was particularly identifiable, interviewees predominantly legitimated change through rationalisation strategies. In Scotland, where prohibitive, horizontal voice processes were more evident, authorisation strategies tended to prevail. However, regardless of the content and direction of voice, ultimately, the vast majority of key accounting changes in both Westminster and Scotland were supported (legitimated) by actors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it