When huskies bite back: A complex systems metaphor perspective on information technology project management
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
Abstract Researchers have acknowledged the usefulness of metaphors to understand organizational phenomena. More than fancy linguistic ornaments, metaphors can provide a rich understanding of the situation under investigation; demonstrate how individuals think, feel and behave; and be used as a diagnostic tool to help analyse organizational problems. Notwithstanding the importance of metaphor analysis, how system thinking principles can be applied to understand the elicited nature of metaphor in the context of information technology (IT) project management practices remains to be explored in greater detail. Drawing on the field of applied linguistics, coupled with complexity theory, a complex systems metaphor perspective is put forward as a fresh lens to understand IT project management practices. This perspective is illustrated through a discourse analysis of a large IT project in the National Health Service (NHS) in England.
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 | 0.017 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.003 |
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