MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388760549 · doi:10.1080/14759551.2023.2283072

Understanding responses to managerialism: <i>face</i> culture and university faculty working under the shadow of ‘Publish or Perish’

2023· article· en· W4388760549 on OpenAlexaff
Yixuan Wang, Xiaoguang Li, Hong‐Ming Cheng, Lizhi Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCulture and Organization · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsManagerialismContext (archaeology)SociologyGratitudeShadow (psychology)CLARITYFace (sociological concept)ConstructiveOrganizational culturePublicationEmpirical researchPublic relationsManagementPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceSocial psychologyEpistemologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The adoption of a corporate style of university management in China has resulted in a context in which performance indicators are the primary means of assessing university faculty members. Most faculty members work under the ‘shadow’ of managerial control. Drawing on the face culture, this article delineates various complex tactics employed by Chinese university faculty and, more importantly, explores what underpins their behavioral responses. Based on a case study of a highly ranked university in China and in-depth interviews with its faculty members, this study demonstrates that most university faculty members’ tactics fall into four strategic responses founded on facets of face culture. This article provides a new perspective on how responses to managerialism are motivated by face among socially admired professionals in Asian cultures and more widely.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCulture and OrganizationSame topicManagement and Organizational StudiesFrench-language works237,207