Revitalizing Organizational Memory through Hermeneutic Phenomenology: Interpreting Information System Change in Ontario’s Child Protection Sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After a period of robust activity in the 1990s and early 2000s, organizational memory has become a marginal topic in the study of information systems. To revitalize this debate, this paper looks at organizational memory from a phenomenological perspective. Traditional approaches to organizational memory have relied on knowledge-focused cognitivist assumptions. In this paper, an additional form of organizational memory is proposed that is embodied in the referential holism of equipment, environment, and socialization, which underpin being-in-the-world. This kind of organizational memory is not already obvious, but is hidden in plain sight. Three examples from the implementation of a new centralized enterprise case management system in the Canadian province of Ontario illustrate this understanding. This paper contributes both a more nuanced account of the phenomenon of organizational memory, as well as a phenomenological hermeneutic method to enable the study of this non-obvious background memory that underpins meaningful action in the world.
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 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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".