{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024830699774266364, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.669172932330827, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Core task and organizational reality

Reflecting a wider trend in the social sciences, the field of organization studies has adopted an increasingly general and metaphysical vocabulary to guide and frame its analyses of life and dynamics in organizations. Where classic organizational analyses would describe organizations in terms of core objects such as ‘task’ and ‘coordination,’ contemporary organization studies emphasize, much like other social science disciplines, broader topics such as ‘network,’ ‘identity,’ and ‘change.’ The paper argues that this altered focus and vocabulary is accompanied by a diminished ability to specify and intervene into the practical reality of organizations. It further argues that a discipline's core objects are not anachronisms to be discarded with, but crucial for specifying reality in ways that have proven practically relevant and still are.