Controlling public services: only what's visible matters?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Questo articolo presenta i risultati di una ricerca condotta su tre Comuni italiani e avente ad oggetto i sistemi di controllo dei servizi pubblici esternalizzati. Dopo aver presentato il mix di sistemi di controllo adottato dalle città, ne discute le possibili determinanti, ponendo in evidenza che il sistema di controllo nella realtà pubblica tiene in considerazione, oltre alle variabili normative e a quelle attinenti al tipo di attività da svolgere, anche quelle che riguardano la relazione fra i soggetti coinvolti nella prestazione del servizio (utente/cittadino, erogatore del servizio, Comune). The paper presents the results of a research project investigating three Italian Municipalities and the mechanisms they put in place to control externalised public services. After analysing the mix of controls adopted by the Municipalities, the paper identifies and discusses their determinants, showing that control systems in public-sector organisations are strongly influenced not only by legal and task-related variables, but also by factors more directly associated with the relationship among the different parties involved in the service provision (namely, customer/citizen, service provider, Municipality).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".