Sustainability cross‐sector partnerships: The strategic role of organizational structures
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 Organizations partner for strategic reasons and sustainability is a strategic opportunity. However, organizations' strategic engagement in sustainability partnerships has been mainly qualitatively studied. This research aims to determine if structures, a key component of the strategy, are implemented within organizations when joining sustainability partnerships, whether organizational structures mediate between goals and outcomes achieved from partnering, if highly structured organizations achieve highly valued outcomes, and if organizational structures differ according to the sector. Data from 224 organizations from the public, civil society, and private sectors partnering in large cross‐sector partnerships for the sustainability of four cities were collected and quantitatively analyzed finding that structures are implemented by organizations when partnering for sustainability, that is, sustainability partnerships are strategic; structures do not mediate between goals and outcomes; being highly structured is not enough for accomplishing valuable outcomes; and informal structural features are the most implemented by organizations, with public sector organizations differing from other sectors.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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