Getting rid of the boss for building postcapitalist futures: \nHow non-hierarchical work practices of two Quebec-based initiatives impact livelihoods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the aftermaths of the 2008 economic crisis, with rising inequalities and environmental destruction, many people are looking for alternatives to the capitalist economy to nourish sustainable futures. Getting rid of hierarchy in the workplace is an idea that has been defended for over a century in many places to challenge the capitalist economy and its exploitation of human beings and nature. Using participant observations and descriptions based on the diverse economy framework developed by JK Gibson-Graham (2006; Gibson-Graham, Cameron & Healy. 2013), interesting non-hierarchical work practices taking place in two Quebec-based economic initiatives are unveiled and analyzed, exposing how these can impact livelihoods in a perspective of building just and sustainable postcapitalist futures. Without falling into the defence of a rigid model of transformation of the economy for a revolutionary agenda, the analysis exposes how non-hierarchical work practices are part of a plurality of practices, framed by organizational principles, that are negotiated amongst workers in the pursuit of their general well-being and the quality of their livelihoods. The impacts are presented and analyzed in relations to the sense of work, working conditions and inequalities and their articulations in the construction and negotiation of individual livelihoods. With this approach, we go beyond theoretical descriptions of workplace democracy and offer insights and reflections for further work on the actual enactment of the dismantlement of hierarchy at work.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".