History as Postmodern? Revisiting the Debate Across Historical Organization Studies
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
Efforts to enact a ‘turn’ to an historically-informed ethos in management and organization studies have resulted in a proliferation of research across multiple scholarly communities. This is paralleled by an age-old philosophical divide of differing approaches to historical research. The reorientationalist agenda of the historic turn has led to sharp debate between seemingly divergent communities of history researchers. Controversy of its supposed philosophy, namely postmodernism, has caused the ire of some and celebration of others within the broad church of historical research on business and organizations. This paper seeks to destabilize the characterization of the historic turn as being wholly taken up by postmodernism by historicizing the conditions of its possibility. Throughout the process we unravel the constituent elements of the popularized historic turn and attempt to make sense of its ethic as a vehicle of critique.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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