Organizational Change in Human Service Organizations: A Review and Content Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This literature review examines organizational change scholarship within human service organizations (“health,” “human,” and “social” services) between 1968 and 2020. MEDLINE, CINAHL, Social Work Abstracts, EMBASE, and Sociology Collection databases were searched for peer-reviewed, English-language items. The vast majority of first authors were based in the UK, the US, Australia, and Canada, though UK-based authors produced over a third of included items. Forty-two journals had multiple included items. Four main, interconnected themes were identified and discussed: external rationales for change (e.g. adopting evidence-based practices, structural shifts, community demands); type and level of change (e.g. frontline interventions, restructuring management, improving internal and external relations); implementing changes (targeted interventions, broader implementation models, and successful “tactics”); and internal characteristics that both promote and inhibit change (leadership, readiness, communication, learning orientation, skills). Growing scholarship warrants frequent review and summarization for diverse 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".