The Emergence of Mythologies in Organisations: A process model
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
Research on organisational storytelling has shed light on different types of narratives. A specific story type, organisational myths, has caught the interest of some scholars in the field, but has not been theorised in any great detail. While it is rarely disputed that organisational members can and do develop emotional connections to myths and mythical stories in their social context, how and why these myths, or ‘sacred stories’, emerge in organisational settings has remained mostly unaddressed. Therefore, drawing upon a Jungian psychosocial approach, we propose a process model for the emergence of mythologised stories in organisations by situating members’ psychological dynamics within the social context in which they emerge. We propose that a conscious understanding of the conditions that lead to the emergence of mythologised stories in organisations can help clarify and deepen the relationship between different types of stories to support and sustain organisational change and development. The paper contributes to the existing literature on organisational storytelling and myths within organisational studies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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