The Unfolding of Control Mechanisms inside Organizations: Pathways of Customization and Transmutation
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
Organizational control is a fundamental function of all organizations. Drawing on ethnographic data from one hospital implementing a new behavioral control mechanism across multiple internal units, I explore how control mechanisms spread and unfold inside organizations. This study shows that control mechanisms are co-created through interactions between managers and employees as they engage in an iterative team learning process in two stages: (1) learning about the mandated control mechanism in order to assess its viability in their local context; and (2) learning how to (re)design the control mechanism so that it delivers its intended control outcomes. It also identifies two pathways through which control mechanisms unfold. Along the customization pathway, teams customize the mandated control mechanism so that it functions well in their context. Along the transmutation pathway, teams develop their own locally designed alternative control mechanism to achieve the intended control outcomes based on their own assessment of their unit’s problems. By showing how organizational control mechanisms are co-created by management and employees, this study provides a dynamic view of how control mechanisms spread and unfold within organizations.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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