MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200525453 · doi:10.1080/14719037.2021.2014165

Adopting management philosophies: management gurus, public organizations, and the Economies of Worth

2021· article· en· W4200525453 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Management Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
FundersHealth Foundation
KeywordsNormativePluralism (philosophy)Value (mathematics)Public managementSociologyNormative model of decision-makingValue pluralismPositive economicsEconomicsEpistemologyPublic relationsLawPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Management gurus are increasingly prominent in public organizations. However, research generally evaluates guru ideas as primarily pragmatic suggestions, neglecting gurus’ value-laden ‘philosophies’. Particularly in pluralistic public organizations, we suggest that this normative content may significantly shape whether, why, and how such ideas are used. To interrogate this, we investigate a guru idea’s adoption by an English hospital using the Economies of Worth framework, which highlights values and pluralism. We find that guru ideas may be adopted because their normative content can help otherwise divided organizations forge compromises. However, these compromises bring normative constraints and promote risk-aversion in turbulent times.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it