The Anxiety-Provoking Risks of Performance Management and Its Alternative Solutions in the Banking Environment
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
The theory of performance has a unique character as it has allowed the creation of large organizations. It borrows from economic theory the criteria of effectiveness and efficiency. Performance theory itself has a sound foundation, particularly, financial and accounting ones without taking into account its global field of investigation: the organization and the man. In other words, this part of psychology acts and interacts with the organization. This article pursues four main objectives. First, it reminds the central elements of the theory of performance regarding the “capabilities” of “stakeholders.” Second, it aims to identify the factors of performance failure caused by a lack of consideration of global criteria to build a coherent model of optimal management. Third, it maps the risks caused by defects, differences, and gaps in performance management. Finally, it tries to provide an alternative plausible solution to establish more effective performance management. The primary domain is management science while the input from psychology remains limited and applicable only to specific elements such as psycho-social phenomena.
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