Embedding a “Reflexive Mindset”: Lessons From Reconfiguring the Internal Auditing Practice
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 education and training of internal auditors is an example of management learning which has received limited attention in management education journals. This paper presents the lessons from an action research inquiry designed to reconfigure the Internal Auditing function to address the problem of a conformance mindset and compliance-based approach. We show how cultivating a ‘reflexive mindset’ becomes a critical catalyst in developing an Internal Auditing approach that leads to the identification of misconduct, conduct risk and deficiencies in the organization’s conduct risk management and governance frameworks. We contribute to advance reflexivity as a practice that can support the reconfiguration of management functions like Internal Auditing, not only by readjusting operating routines but also by encouraging internal auditors to critically (re)consider how their activities may contribute to the common good of the organization’s members and customers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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