Integrating national culture into the organizational performance feedback theory
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 organizational response to performance feedback is a collective process in which groups of decision-makers face uncertainty about the future when making organizational decisions based on past performance feedback. Culture is an important variable to explain the context of collective decision processes, but it is not well understood by Organizational Performance Feedback Theory (PFT) research. The current internationalization trend of PFT research poses the question if empirical results are comparable across different cultural settings, and whether culture is a general condition of organizational performance feedback. We analyze the role of national culture as a proxy for collective interpretive processes that influence the organizational decision-making process in response to performance feedback, and we resolve some of the unexplained variances in the empirical results. We use a meta-analysis to understand if national culture poses a general condition for the organizational performance feedback process. We analyze the empirical results of 153 PFT studies covering organizations from 16 countries, and we examine the impact of four dimensions of national culture: uncertainty avoidance, performance orientation, future orientation, and institutional collectivism. We demonstrate that national culture is an important concept for PFT development.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.009 |
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