The 'rational' organization reconsidered: an exploration of some of the organizational implications of self-organizing
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
This paper argues for an enlargement of our conception of rationality to include forms of reasoning, intelligence, and cognition that are communicatively, rather than discursively, based. To defend the thesis that understanding emerges in the collective interactive processes of practically situated conversation, as well as in individual thought, this paper examines the theoretical literature devoted to self-organizing systems and the empirical literature that describes how distributed intelligence is developed by groups in materially embedded contexts of work. It then explores the phenomenon of emergence of organization as an actor, capable of expressing an intention and participating in a dialogue involving other organizations. It explains this phenomenon of the emerging organizational self as a logical implication of the theory of self-organizing, which predicates ‘self-ness’ as an effect of the coupling of an autopoietic system to an observer. Whereas this has tended to be interpreted in intersubjective contexts of communication, it can also be applied to organizational communication. Implications of such a revision of perspective are briefly considered, including a critique of current interpretations of dialogics.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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