MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028217078

Escaping Conformity : Hur småskaliga företag bedriver kommunikationsarbete

2025· article· en· W7028217078 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Identity and Reputation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConformityPerspective (graphical)Work (physics)Position (finance)Field (mathematics)Field research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis explores how small-scale businesses in Stockholm and Uppsala handle communicative work, with escape rooms as the example investigated. Interviews are conducted with employees managing communicative tasks. Areas of analysis are branding and authoring (as per the Montreal school of communication, in the CCO perspective on organizations). Due to the fact that small-scale businesses are underrepresented in previous research in the field of organization communication, this essay aims to provide further findings and expand upon the research in the field. Moreover, as CCO perspectives, and the Montreal school in particular, are mainly adapted to research on large-scale organizations, this essay evaluates how well it can be used to analyze smaller organizations. The findings show that reported authoring within the companies varies, as due to company size as well as position of the representative interviewed. Further, the extent to which branding is used as a strategy within the organizations varies from virtually no use, to considerable integration internally as well as externally. All interviewees express that the communicative work within their respective companies is as of yet underdeveloped, and requires more work to reach satisfactory capacity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)Same topicCorporate Identity and ReputationFrench-language works237,207