“I am happy to take the lead”. A ventriloquial perspective on leadership and authority: What authorises organisational players to take the lead?
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
Authority has long been associated with leadership, but the relationship between authority and leadership has remained elusive. Addressing the issue of the interplay between authority and leadership, this paper builds on limited recent work that has considered leadership to be an in situ accomplishment in which the doing of authority is interwoven with the doing of leadership. Using transcripts of real-time interaction taken from a Board meeting of an NGO, and applying the Montreal School’s ventriloquial approach to the analysis of organisational communication, the research question this paper asks is: what authorises one of the Board members to ‘take the lead’ in establishing measures to ensure that the actions of the NGO are sustainable? Findings suggest that it is neither position, nor expertise, that authorise leadership. Rather, it is the articulation of the ideal of sustainability. Leadership is thus shown to be both a question of human leaders and ideals that they are able to mobilise which authorise their claim to leadership.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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