HAO Corpus References

The canonical bibliography for works cited by the HAO corpus, followed by the separately assembled research library and its extraction notes.

1. Scope and method

This appendix distinguishes two source sets. Section 2 is the canonical bibliography for works that remain cited in the corpus after a full citation and claim audit. Section 4 is the separately assembled 116-work research library preserved from the earlier extraction pass; §5 preserves that pass’s exclusions and anomalies.

The audit froze the 48 records in the former §2 as its baseline and independently scanned the numbered chapters, docs/humanized-autonomous-organization.md, and docs/appendices/lineage.md for live author–year citations. Four additional citation candidates found in that scan received supplemental records. Local file paths, corpus cross-references, statutes, and named provenance artifacts were excluded from the citation inventory unless the corpus cited an external publication through them.

For each of the 52 audit records, the audit established or tested the bibliographic identity, rebuilt every live occurrence, identified the claim or reference-list scope attached to it, and assigned an occurrence-level verdict. Evidence came from original publications, official publisher or journal records, DOI and authoritative registry metadata, author or responsible-organization archives, and official repositories. General web search was used to locate those records, not as evidence. A similarly titled work was not substituted for a defective citation unless that different work was separately inspected and adopted; no such replacement was made in this audit.

The resulting §2 contains 39 distinct works: 36 works represented by retained or merged baseline records and three retained supplemental works. Eleven baseline records were removed, one supplemental record was removed, and the duplicate Ostrom identity B035 was merged with B032. The complete occurrence-level evidence, search boundaries, verdicts, repairs, and unresolved identity or access limits are in Full Citation Audit.

The research library in §4 remains a separate 116-work extraction. Comparison by canonical title finds no overlap between its 116 titles and the 39 works in §2. Its annotations retain their original status as condensations of the staged library summaries; the full citation audit did not convert those annotations into claim-level reviews of the underlying 116 works.

2. Works cited in the corpus

Thirty-nine distinct works remain in, or were added to, the canonical corpus bibliography. Entries are ordered by the canonical first-listed author or responsible organization. The invisible audit comments connect each work to its stable record in Full Citation Audit; B032 and B035 identify the same 1990 book and therefore share one entry.

Ardener, S., & Burman, S. (Eds.). (1995). Money-Go-Rounds: The Importance of Rotating Savings and Credit Associations for Women. Berg.
Bauwens, M., Kostakis, V., & Pazaitis, A. (2019). Peer to Peer: The Commons Manifesto. University of Westminster Press.
Bloom, S. L., & Farragher, B. (2013). Restoring Sanctuary: A New Operating System for Trauma-Informed Systems of Care. Oxford University Press.
Bollier, D., & Conaty, P. (2016). Democratic Money and Capital for the Commons: Strategies for Transforming Neoliberal Finance Through Commons-Based Alternatives. Commons Strategies Group in cooperation with the Heinrich Böll Foundation.
Bollier, D., & Helfrich, S. (Eds.). (2015). Patterns of Commoning. Commons Strategies Group in cooperation with Off the Common Books.
Dardot, P., & Laval, C. (2019). Common: On Revolution in the 21st Century (M. MacLellan, Trans.; I. Szeman, Preface). Bloomsbury Academic.
De Filippi, P., & Wright, A. (2018). Blockchain and the Law: The Rule of Code. Harvard University Press.
Fairbairn, B. (2003). Three Strategic Concepts for the Guidance of Co-operatives: Linkage, Transparency, and Cognition. Centre for the Study of Co-operatives, University of Saskatchewan.
Gash, M., & Odell, K. (2013). The Evidence-Based Story of Savings Groups: A Synthesis of Seven Randomized Control Trials. SEEP Research, Savings-led Financial Services Working Group at the SEEP Network.
Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2006). The End of Capitalism (As We Knew It): A Feminist Critique of Political Economy (new ed.). University of Minnesota Press.
Greenfield, A. (2017). Radical Technologies: The Design of Everyday Life. Verso.
Hardin, G. (1968). “The Tragedy of the Commons.” Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248.
Ito, J., & Howe, J. (2016). Whiplash: How to Survive Our Faster Future. Grand Central Publishing.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). “Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at Work.” Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724.
Kelly, M. (2012). Owning Our Future: The Emerging Ownership Revolution: Journeys to a Generative Economy. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Kostakis, V., & Bauwens, M. (2014). Network Society and Future Scenarios for a Collaborative Economy. Palgrave Pivot/Palgrave Macmillan.
Lessig, L. (2006). Code: Version 2.0 (2nd ed.). Basic Books.
Lietaer, B., Arnsperger, C., Goerner, S., & Brunnhuber, S. (2012). Money and Sustainability: The Missing Link. Triarchy Press.
McMillan, J., & Woodruff, C. (1999). “Interfirm Relationships and Informal Credit in Vietnam.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(4), 1285–1320.
Moyer, M. (2012). Slicing Pie: Funding Your Business Without Funds. Lake Shark Ventures.
Narayanan, A., Bonneau, J., Felten, E., Miller, A., & Goldfeder, S. (2016). Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies: A Comprehensive Introduction. Princeton University Press.
Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded Edition. Basic Books.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press.
Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton University Press.
Ostrom, E. (2010). “Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems.” American Economic Review, 100(3), 641–672.
Pentland, A., Lipton, A., & Hardjono, T. (2021). Building the New Economy: Data as Capital. MIT Press.
Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century (A. Goldhammer, Trans.). The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Poteete, A. R., Janssen, M. A., & Ostrom, E. (2010). Working Together: Collective Action, the Commons, and Multiple Methods in Practice. Princeton University Press.
Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist. Random House Business Books.
Ries, E. (2011). The Lean Startup: How Today’s Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses. Crown Business.
Schley, D. G. (2010). “Origins and Development of the Cellular Organization.” In M. A. Rahim (Ed.), Current Topics in Management: Volume 14, Organizational Behavior, Performance, and Effectiveness (pp. 119–148). Transaction Publishers.
Scholz, T. (2016). Platform Cooperativism: Challenging the Corporate Sharing Economy. Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung—New York Office.
Scholz, T., & Schneider, N. (Eds.). (2016). Ours to Hack and to Own: The Rise of Platform Cooperativism, a New Vision for the Future of Work and a Fairer Internet. OR Books.
Scott, J. C. (1998). Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. Yale University Press.
Service Design Network. (2019). Touchpoint: The Journal of Service Design, 11(1), “Service Design for Innovation and Start-ups.”
Snow, C. C., Miles, R. E., & Allred, B. B. (2003). “Managing Leading-Edge Multinational Corporations.” In B. McKern (Ed.), Managing the Global Network Corporation (digital ed., pp. 215–233). Routledge.
Standing, G. (2011). The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. Bloomsbury Academic.
Weeks, K. (2011). The Problem with Work: Feminism, Marxism, Antiwork Politics, and Postwork Imaginaries. Duke University Press.
Wikipedia contributors. (2016). “Cellular organizational structure.” Wikipedia, permanent revision 756005860, 21 December 2016, 12:31:29 UTC.

3. Citation integrity audit: completed

The full audit closes the earlier staging pass’s 11-item citation-integrity task. That task consisted of one author-attribution error, one year inconsistency, one title-and-year conflation, and eight identities that the staging pass could not corroborate:

B017 was corrected from Fairfield to Mike Moyer and to the verified title Slicing Pie: Funding Your Business Without Funds.
B033 was normalized to the verified 2005 publication year for Understanding Institutional Diversity.
B035 was identified as a duplicate, misdated form of B032 and merged into the 1990 Governing the Commons entry.
B003, B005, B006, B007, B014, B019, B031, and B036 were removed after the audit found no primary record for the cited identity within the documented search boundary, or found that the supplied metadata belonged to a different work. Related publications were not substituted silently.

The full-corpus pass also resolved defects outside that original list. B009 and B047 were removed because their cited identities could not be established. B015 identifies a real book, but its pre-audit placement did not establish a relationship to the containing section, so that occurrence and its canonical-list placement were removed. S001 was removed because Dunbar’s 1992 primate study does not support an 8–15-person human work-team range. B032 and B035 now share one canonical work; no replacement work was added. The remaining metadata corrections include canonical author responsibility, edition, title, publication year, publisher, DOI, and pagination where the former forms conflicted with primary records.

The audit also assessed the claims attached to each occurrence. Supported claims were retained and citations normalized; partially supported claims were narrowed to the inspected source; broad but unattached works remain only as scoped general references; unsupported source attributions were removed; and surviving model mechanisms that exceed the sources are identified as corpus proposals. The lineage account now distinguishes the verified Wikipedia revision and the two corrected scholarly chapter identities from chronology that the available repository record cannot establish.

The 48 baseline records and four supplemental records remain in Full Citation Audit, including records for removed and merged citations. That appendix is the controlling record for occurrence locations, verdicts, pinpoint evidence, bounded searches, forbidden historical strings, repair actions, and unresolved identity or access limits. Section 2 above is only the canonical bibliography of the 39 works that remain cited after those decisions.

4. Research library

116 works, assembled from the deduplicated PDF collection described in §1, grouped by the seven themes the staging extraction used, with its group counts. One annotated entry per work. The entries began as condensations of machine-generated summaries; the identities and selected descriptions for icn-0001, icn-0004, icn-0013, icn-0015, icn-0016, icn-0028, icn-0030, icn-0035, icn-0037, icn-0038, icn-0040, icn-0042, icn-0046, icn-0047, icn-0058, icn-0060, icn-0062, icn-0063, icn-0064, icn-0065, icn-0067, icn-0068, icn-0069, icn-0070, icn-0071, icn-0072, icn-0073, icn-0074, icn-0076, icn-0077, icn-0078, icn-0079, icn-0080, icn-0083, icn-0084, icn-0085, icn-0087, icn-0088, icn-0089, icn-0090, icn-0091, icn-0092, icn-0093, icn-0095, icn-0098, icn-0099, icn-0100, icn-0101, icn-0102, icn-0103, icn-0105, icn-0107, icn-0112, icn-0113, icn-0114, icn-0115, icn-0117 and icn-0118 were later corrected against original documents. Those bounded corrections do not verify every statement in those entries or the remaining staged annotations. Entries marked [metadata incomplete] still lack a reliable author or publication year (5 of 116). Each entry closes with its library reference key (for example, [icn-0013]) for traceability back to the canonical collection. Private review notes preserve the corrections and their limits.

The subsequent checks of icn-0012, icn-0014, icn-0017, icn-0021, icn-0022, icn-0026, icn-0027, icn-0029, icn-0034, icn-0036, icn-0039, icn-0043, icn-0061, icn-0066, icn-0094, icn-0097, icn-0106, icn-0108, icn-0109, icn-0110 and icn-0111 likewise correct their source types and the limits of their staged claims.

Polycentric Governance & Commons (22)

Costs and Challenges of Polycentric Governance — Michael McGinnis (revised 2011). This working paper proposes a framework for comparing governance costs. It describes participant time and effort, pressures towards standardisation, and the risk of treating polycentric order as automatically socially optimal. These are analytical arguments, not tests of HAO performance. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0013]
Multi-Stakeholder Governance in Cooperative Organizations: Toward a New Framework for Research? — Catherine Leviten-Reid; Brett Fairbairn (2011). This review challenges theoretical predictions of failure from high decision-making costs using limited survey and case-study evidence. It proposes common-pool governance as a research comparison, without testing that analogy or HAO’s governance design. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0015]
Redefining Polycentricity — Chen Zhong (2014). This short author blog post concerns urban spatial clusters and their measurement, not polycentric governance among decision-making centres. One generated claim came from an unrelated “Recent Posts” sidebar. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0058]
What is Dynamic Governance? — Becky Bowen, J.D. (PDF created August 2014; publication date not printed). This first-person explainer describes consent for policy decisions, semi-autonomous circles, double-linking and consent elections, then suggests meeting practices. Its only reported result is the author’s impression of one facilitation; it does not measure organisational effects. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [metadata incomplete] [icn-0026]
Dynamic Governance in Theory and Application, Part I — David L. Markell; Robert L. Glicksman (2016). Arizona Law Review, 58(3), 563–632. The library PDF is a pre-publication draft. This conceptual legal analysis proposes an actors–mechanisms–tools framework and examines EPA’s Next Generation Compliance initiative. Its use of “dynamic governance” concerns regulatory design, not the consent-based circle method described in icn-0026; it does not evaluate HAO. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0029]
Polycentric Governance in Theory and Practice: Dimensions of Aspiration and Practical Limitations — Michael D. McGinnis (2016 draft; posted to SSRN in 2021). The author proposes a structure–process–outcome definition and six possible failure modes, while distinguishing the normative ideal from practical approximations. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0030]
Distributed Governance — Carla L. Reyes; Nizan Geslevich Packin; Benjamin P. Edwards (2017). William & Mary Law Review Online, 59, Article 1. This legal analysis examines governance opportunities and risks for entities using distributed ledger technology; it is not a general account of polycentric human organisations. The audit handoff misidentified the authors and work; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0080]
Polycentric Systems of Governance: A Theoretical Model for the Commons — Keith Carlisle; Rebecca L. Gruby (2019 journal volume; first online 2017). This literature synthesis proposes defining attributes and context-dependent enabling conditions for commons governance. It does not establish that polycentric systems consistently outperform alternatives. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0035]
Polycentric Governance Processes — Author unknown (2018). The material contains a section titled ‘Part III: Polycentric Governance Processes’. [metadata incomplete] [icn-0081]
United People: Designing a New Model of Global Governance — A. Georges L. Romme; Christopher Ansell; John Buck; Younghoon Choi; Rob van der Eyden; Verónica Figueroa Huencho; Edwin John; Tracy Kunkler; Johanna Mair; Albert Meijer; Renate Meyer; Karen Stephenson; Liisa Välikangas; Nathaniel Whitestone; Cordelia Yu (2018). Journal of Asian Scientific Research, 8(4), 152–170. This idealised global-governance design proposes small linked councils, informed-consent policy decisions and an executive board; it does not test their effects. The staged summary invents an algorithm and allocation metrics absent from the article. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0036]
An Introduction to Polycentricity and Governance — Mark Stephan; Graham Marshall; Michael McGinnis (2019). This conceptual chapter distinguishes polycentricity, polycentric arrangements and governance systems. It recounts biological uses of the term but does not establish that those uses transmitted into the 1961 Ostrom–Tiebout–Warren account. Its performance comparison is limited to some settings. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0042]
It’s Ordered Chaos: What Really Makes Polycentrism Work — Maria Koinova; Maryam Zarnegar Deloffre; Frank Gadinger; Zeynep Sahin Mencutek; Jan Aart Scholte; Jens Steffek (2021). International Studies Review, 23(4), 1988–2018. This six-author theoretical forum proposes several relational lenses for interpreting polycentric global governance, illustrated in different policy fields. It does not compare their performance or establish HAO ancestry. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0044]
Polycentric Collaborative Governance, Sustainable Development and the Ecological Resilience of Elevator Safety: Evidence from a Structural Equation Model — Rijia Ding; Chongbao Ren; Suli Hao; Qi Lan; Mingbo Tan (2022). Sustainability, 14(12), 7124. The authors model associations between a proposed multi-actor governance framework and elevator-safety resilience using questionnaire responses from Chinese elevator-safety units. The study’s sector and survey design limit transfer to HAO governance. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0047]
The Evolution of Polycentric Governance in the Galapagos Small-Scale Fishing Sector — Renato Cáceres; Jeremy Pittman; Mauricio Castrejón; Peter Deadman (2022). This study uses network, interview and document evidence to explore collaboration in the fishing sector. Its 28 candidate nodes and a separate 43-organisation prior network must not be conflated. Bounded handoff spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0046]
A Progressive Web3: From Social Coproduction to Digital Polycentric Governance — Quinn DuPont (2023 draft, revised 8 February). This conceptual essay proposes studying decentralised autonomous organisations (DAOs) as possible sites of digital polycentric governance. Its DAO-data research programme is prospective; it does not test governance outcomes or establish HAO ancestry. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0050]
Building Blocks of Polycentric Governance — Tiffany H. Morrison; Örjan Bodin; Graeme S. Cumming; Mark Lubell; Ralf Seppelt; Tim Seppelt; Christopher M. Weible (2023). Policy Studies Journal, 51, 475–499. The authors test a three-mode network-motif method on a reconstructed Great Barrier Reef governance case at three time points. This is a proof of concept, not evidence that the method or polycentric governance improves HAO outcomes. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0049]
Humanistic Governance in Democratic Organizations: The Cooperative Difference — Sonja Novković; Karen Miner; Cian McMahon (eds., 2023). This edited volume examines cooperative governance across different member relationships and organisational contexts. The series’ founding date is not a description of the book’s findings. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0089]
Polycentric Governing and Polycentric Governance — Andreas Thiel (2023). This conceptual chapter distinguishes descriptions of multi-actor governance from normative criteria such as voice, exit and self-organisation. Its examples and cited frameworks do not establish HAO ancestry or performance. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0087]
Conclusions: Critical Reflections on the Epistemic Adequacy of the Western Legal Approach to Square the Circle and Grant a Common Future for All — Margherita Paola Poto (2023). In Sustainability through Participation?, 491–519. This concluding chapter synthesises the volume and argues for re-examining anthropocentric assumptions in environmental law through plural, participatory approaches. Its conceptual critique is not an evaluation of HAO governance. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0051]
The Exchange Theory of Web3 Governance — Darcy W. E. Allen; Chris Berg; Aaron M. Lane; Trent MacDonald; Jason Potts (2023). Kyklos, 76, 659–675. This conceptual article contrasts a community-voting account of Web3 governance with an exchange-based account, illustrated by Curve, Lido and Metagov. Its proposed benefits of governance-rights exchange and polycentricity are arguments, not measured outcomes or evidence of HAO ancestry. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0053]
The Black Box of Power in Polycentric Environmental Governance — T.H. Morrison; W.N. Adger; K. Brown; M.C. Lemos; D. Huitema; J. Phelps; L. Evans; P. Cohen; A.M. Song; R. Turner; T. Quinn; T.P. Hughes (2019). Global Environmental Change, 57, 101934. This Perspective examines how power shapes rule-setting, issue construction and implementation in polycentric environmental governance. Three staged claims were drawn from its reference list rather than its analysis; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0056]
Dynamic Governance Summary — Glenda Mattison (created); John Buck, Tena M. O’Rear and Monika Megyesi (edited; sheet dated March 2009, © 2008 Sociocratisch Centrum). This two-page reference distinguishes proposal formation, consent decisions, elections, circle meetings and leader-led operational meetings. Three staged claims join text from different columns; see the bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0001]

Cybernetics, VSM & Holonic Systems (incl. Emergent Cooperation / Multi-Agent Models) (26)

Hierarchical Control System Emulation: User’s Manual — Cita M. Furlani, ed. (1985). National Bureau of Standards, NBS IR 85-3156. This manual documents a real-time emulation and simulation tool for modular hierarchical control systems, especially automated manufacturing; its introduction treats simulation as a design aid for feedback control. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0004]
Holonic Manufacturing Systems: Initial Architecture and Standards Directions — James H. Christensen (presented 1 December 1994, First European Conference on Holonic Manufacturing Systems, Hannover). This conference paper proposes an initial manufacturing architecture of autonomous, cooperative holons, interface functions and standards tasks. The author calls it his synthesis rather than a consortium consensus; its projected manufacturing benefits are not HAO outcomes. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0068]
A Complex Adaptive Systems Model of Organization Change — Kevin J. Dooley (1997). Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 1(1), 69–97. This literature-based paper proposes a model of organisational change drawing on systems theory, population ecology and information processing. Its change strategies and fitness curve are conceptual, not measured HAO outcomes. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0006]
Conflict Detection and Resolution in the Presence of Prediction Error — Heinz Erzberger; Russell A. Paielli; Douglas R. Isaacson; Michelle M. Eshow (1997). Prepared for the 1st USA/Europe Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar, this paper describes the aviation-specific Conflict Probe and reports search-algorithm performance tests. It does not evaluate HAO conflict governance or the FAST feedback acronym used elsewhere in the library. Primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0097]
Holonic Manufacturing Scheduling: Architecture, Cooperation Mechanism, and Implementation — Ling Gou; Peter B. Luh; Yuji Kyoya (1998). Computers in Industry, 37(3), 213–231. This manufacturing-scheduling study tests a two-level holonic optimisation method using factory-derived data on a single workstation. It does not test a distributed physical implementation or HAO governance. Five staged rows contain column-spliced text or reference/biography material; see the bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0069]
Knowledge Workers as Fractals in a Complex Adaptive Organization — Snunith Shoham; Alon Hasgall (2005). Knowledge and Process Management 12(3), 225–236. A qualitative study of interviews and observations at six organisations examines employees as knowledge-bearing subsystems and the coordination of their work; its findings do not establish HAO’s ancestry or performance. The local copy is an uncorrected proof, whose provisional author line differs from the publisher-deposited citation. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0009]
Extracting the Hierarchical Organization of Complex Systems — Marta Sales-Pardo; Roger Guimerà; André A. Moreira; Luís A. Nunes Amaral (2007). PNAS 104(39), 15224–15229. The paper tests an unsupervised method for identifying nested modules in simulated and selected empirical networks; it does not test organisational governance or HAO architecture. A published correction replaces Fig. 1B without changing the authors’ conclusions. Three staged quotations splice the PDF’s columns; see the bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0010]
Turn Your Company Outside-In! How to Create the Adaptive Network Organization: A Concept Paper on Cell Structure Design, Part I — Gebhard Borck; Valeria Junqueira; Niels Pflaeging; Andreas Zeuch (October 2008; revised February 2009). This BBTN Associates white paper proposes cell-based network design; it does not measure transformation outcomes. Three generated claims come from service-promotional backmatter and are not research evidence. See the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately) and earlier identity spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0099]
The Viable System Model and Its Application to Complex Organizations — Allenna Leonard (2009). Systemic Practice and Action Research, 22, 223–233. Leonard explains Stafford Beer’s five-system model, its communication channels and recursion, with a small-business example and an account of the Chilean Cybersyn project. This is Leonard’s interpretation and historical account, not an original Beer publication or evidence that the model shaped HAO. Bounded primary-PDF and claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0071]
The Origins and Purposes of Several Traditions in Systems Theory and Cybernetics — Stuart A. Umpleby; Eric B. Dent (1999; online posting 2010). Cybernetics & Systems, 30(2), 79–103. This historical review distinguishes several systems and cybernetics traditions; it is secondary historical analysis, not evidence of HAO ancestry. One staged quotation has an OCR artifact; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0073]
New Federated Collaborative Networked Organization Model (FCNOM) — Morcous M. Yassa; Hesham A. Hassan; Fatma A. Omara (2012). International Journal of Cloud Computing and Services Science, 1(1), 1–10. This paper proposes a model of collaborative networked organisations and illustrates it with an insurance case; the local PDF contains only printed pp. 3–10. Its model description does not establish measured effectiveness. Primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0100]
Fractal Organization Theory — Janna Raye (2012). This conceptual essay advocates shared purpose, distributed decisions and two-way communication using fractal and living-systems metaphors. It does not establish organisational performance effects or HAO ancestry. Primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0101]
From Emergent Cooperation to Contextual Trust, and to General Trust: Overlapping Meso-Sized Interaction Arenas and Cooperation Platforms as a Foundation of Pro-Social Behavior — Wolfram Elsner; Henning Schwardt (online 2014; 2015 journal issue). Forum for Social Economics, 44(1), 69–86. This conceptual analysis proposes that cooperative patterns in smaller arenas may support wider trust, while stressing that transfer across arenas is not determined. It does not test HAO outcomes. Primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0108]
Hierarchical Emulation & Data Assimilation into the Sediment Transport Model — Nugzar Margvelashvili; Eddy Campbell; Laurence Murray; Emlyn Jones (2014). Procedia Computer Science 29, 2121–2126. In one idealised-estuary simulation, a hierarchy reflecting dependencies among sediment-model variables improves the emulator’s fit and inferred suspended-solids estimates relative to the compared non-hierarchical emulator. The study uses synthetic observations and does not test organisational hierarchy or HAO. Bounded primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0023]
Holonic Manufacturing System — L. S. Nikam; H. K. Raval; J. S. Bagi (May 2015 per an author-uploaded record; the PDF is undated). This overview presents holonic manufacturing as a proposed response to changing production demands. Its definitions of autonomy, cooperation and integration across manufacturing activities are attributed to the 1994 HMS consortium, not independently established here; its claimed benefits are not measured outcomes. Bounded primary-PDF and claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0077]
Hierarchical Emulation: A Method for Modeling and Comparing Nested Simulators — Rachel H. Oughton; Peter S. Craig (2016). SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification 4(1), 495–519. The authors develop a Bayesian method for related versions of a computer simulator and compare its predictions with standard emulators using an ocean carbon-cycle model. The reported advantage is conditional on that experimental setup and does not test organisational hierarchy or HAO. Bounded primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0031]
Mobility Can Promote the Evolution of Cooperation via Emergent Self-Assortment Dynamics — Jaideep Joshi; Iain D. Couzin; Simon A. Levin; Vishwesha Guttal (2017). PLOS Computational Biology, 13(9), e1005732. Spatially explicit evolutionary simulations and an analytical model show conditional cooperation–cohesion dynamics in mobile biological populations; they do not test human organisations or HAO. Primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0109]
Emergent Coordination Through Competition — Siqi Liu; Guy Lever; Josh Merel; Saran Tunyasuvunakool; Nicolas Heess; Thore Graepel (ICLR 2019). In a simulated multi-agent soccer environment, the authors report coordination among reinforcement-learning agents trained with population-based methods. The findings concern that training setup, not human organisations. Primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0110]
Evolution of Holonic Control Architectures Towards Industry 4.0: A Short Overview — Olivier Cardin; William Derigent; Damien Trentesaux (2018). IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(11), 1243–1248. This literature overview treats overconnectivity and data management as possible enablers of flexible manufacturing control. Its accounts of PROSA and POLLUX relay earlier architectures; the paper does not itself test their performance or HAO governance. Bounded primary-PDF and claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0083]
Effective Assimilation of Technological Innovation in an Organization Characterized as a Complex Adaptive System — Alon E. Hasgall; Niv Ahituv; Nily Naveh (2019). Journal of Innovation Management 7(2), 38–58. A questionnaire study of 300 employees reports associations between complex-adaptive-system characteristics and attitudes towards technological change. The published PDF conflicts on whether the sample covered 15 or 11 organisations, and its regression description conflicts with its stated variable direction. It does not test HAO or establish a causal effect. Bounded primary-PDF review (review retained privately). [icn-0041]
Emergent Cooperation Through Mutual Information Maximization — Santiago Cuervo; Marco Alzate (2020). arXiv:2006.11769v1. This preprint proposes a decentralised reinforcement-learning method and compares it with a baseline in one simulated commons game. Its result does not establish cooperation across all social dilemmas or in HAO. Primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0111]
A Sustainable Ecosystem through Emergent Cooperation in Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning — Fabian Ritz; Daniel Ratke; Thomy Phan; Lenz Belzner; Claudia Linnhoff-Popien (2021). ALIFE 2021, article 74. The paper reports results from a simulated predator–prey environment; the handoff’s ICRA attribution is incorrect. See the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0112]
Emergent Cooperation from Mutual Acknowledgment Exchange — Thomy Phan; Felix Sommer; Philipp Altmann; Fabian Ritz; Lenz Belzner; Claudia Linnhoff-Popien (2022). AAMAS 2022, pp. 1047–1055. The paper evaluates Mutual Acknowledgment Token Exchange (MATE) in three simulated social-dilemma domains. Two staged claims are bibliography entries, and another joins unrelated columns; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0113]
Emergent Cooperation and Deception in Public Good Games — Nicole Orzan; Erman Acar; Davide Grossi; Roxana Rădulescu (2023). Adaptive and Learning Agents Workshop (ALA 2023). The paper studies communication among reinforcement-learning agents in an extended public-goods game. The audit handoff omitted an author and gave the wrong venue; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0114]
Emergent Cooperation under Uncertain Incentive Alignment — Nicole Orzan; Erman Acar; Davide Grossi; Roxana Rădulescu (2024). AAMAS 2024. The paper studies reputation and intrinsic reward in simulated public-goods games with uncertain incentive alignment. The staged title and several generated quotations are incorrect; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0115]
Holographic Organizations: An Introduction — Institute for the Advancement of Service, Susan’s Blog (publication date and individual byline unconfirmed; PDF captured in 2024). This institutional teaching proposes that members and activities express a shared organisational philosophy while retaining distinct perspectives; it also recommends using both holographic and hierarchical elements as appropriate. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [metadata incomplete] [icn-0067]

Cooperative Economics & Worker Ownership (10)

“Pay Equity” through “Equitable Payment” — Alan Pearson (1993 revision of a 1992 Festschrift article). Pearson proposes Time-Span of Discretion as a possible measure for equal pay for work of equal value and reports a 1986 pilot involving 13 employees in one Montréal unit. The small, gender-uneven sample and the paper’s call for further research do not establish a general pay-setting rule or validate HAO compensation. The canonical filename incorrectly says “equitable profit”; see the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0005]
Can Redistribution Accelerate Growth and Development? — François Bourguignon (June 2000 first draft). Prepared for ABCDE/Europe, this literature synthesis examines conditions under which redistribution of productive assets might address market imperfections and support growth. It reports no new empirical results, finds aggregate cross-country evidence inconclusive, and does not show that redistribution in general accelerates growth or validate HAO’s trickle-out mechanism. The research-library cover says January 2000, but the manuscript itself says June; see the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0007]
Solidarity as a Business Model: A Multi-Stakeholder Cooperatives Manual — Margaret Lund, primary author (2011). Published by the Cooperative Development Center at Kent State University, a programme of the Ohio Employee Ownership Center. This practice manual discusses member classes, allocation of governance rights, distribution of surplus, dissolution and transfer rights, and case examples; it presents options rather than a tested rule for HAO. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0014]
Providing the Right Support: Are the Training Needs of Multi-Stakeholder Cooperatives Unique? — Courtney Berner (October 2013). University of Wisconsin Center for Cooperatives informal interview study of seven US multi-stakeholder cooperatives, six in food or agriculture. It concludes that most board-training needs resemble those of other cooperatives, while recommending attention to governance structure, shared mission, and communication and conflict skills. The small, sector-heavy sample does not establish general effects of those recommendations. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0022]
Building Shared Entrepreneurship — Joe Rinehart (2015). Democracy at Work Institute guide for small-business support organisations. It introduces worker-cooperative development questions and gives short case examples; its general claims about job creation and business survival are not independently tested in this brochure. The publisher’s resource page supplies the byline absent from the PDF. Bounded primary-source spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0027]
Limited Liability Companies as Worker Cooperatives — Sarah Sexton (2009, hosting resource record). An Insight Center guide presenting LLC operating-agreement choices for worker cooperatives, including management, voting and withdrawal. Its absolute limited-liability wording has exceptions in the same document; its California filing and tax details are historical, not current legal advice. See the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0037]
The Spectrum of Community Engagement to Ownership — Rosa González of Facilitating Power (2019; developed in partnership with Movement Strategy Center). This practitioner tool places six stances from ignoring a community through deferring to community ownership alongside assessment and planning exercises. Its resource-allocation percentages are presented without an empirical derivation, and its claimed benefits are not outcome findings. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0039]
Building “Next Generation” Democratic Workplaces to Reduce Inequality and Empower Workers: Evidence and Policy Implications from Buffalo-Niagara — Russell Weaver (October 2020). Cornell ILR Buffalo Co-Lab policy report. Its mixed-methods Buffalo-Niagara case study finds associations between union or ESOP presence and wage measures, using census-tract comparisons and modelled employee distributions; the author explicitly says the data do not support causal conclusions. It also reviews worker cooperatives and social-mission businesses and proposes policy measures. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0043]
The Slow Demise of Loconomics — Danny Spitzberg (2021). Interview with Loconomics co-founder Joshua Danielson, first published in STIR and reposted by Grassroots Economic Organizing. Danielson recounts the platform’s product pivot, funding constraints and closure; his account is not an independently verified performance study. Bounded source spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0092]
Cooperative Housing Toolbox: A Practical Guide for Cooperative Success — Northcountry Cooperative Foundation, in partnership with Northcountry Cooperative Development Fund (© 2003). This housing-cooperative guide covers member rights and responsibilities, housing equity forms and board governance. Its PDF creation date is in 2004; that metadata is not a publication date. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0118]

Organizational Psychology & Human Systems (25)

Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being — Richard M. Ryan; Edward L. Deci (2000). American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. The article examines conditions affecting intrinsic motivation and psychological-need satisfaction. The generated OIT name and audit handoff’s claim-ID mapping are unreliable; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0098]
Organizational Behavior: Human Behavior at Work — John W. Newstrom (12th ed., 2007). McGraw-Hill/Irwin. This textbook introduces organisational behaviour across individual, group and whole-system levels. Its definitions and stated goals are pedagogical framing, not evidence that a particular HAO practice works. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0070]
Perceived Match or Mismatch on the Gottman Conflict Styles: Associations with Relationship Outcome Variables — Dean M. Busby; Thomas B. Holman (2009). Family Process, 48(4), 531–545. In a self-report sample of 1,983 heterosexual couples, perceived conflict-style categories were associated with relationship satisfaction, stability, problems and stonewalling. The sample is nonrepresentative and the analysis cross-sectional; it establishes neither causal effects nor transfer to HAO teams. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0012]
Universal Mental Health Program: An Extension of Life Skills Education to Promote Child Mental Health — Narayana Manjunatha; Sahoo Saddichha (2011). Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 53(1), 77–78. This letter to the editor proposes that WHO promote life-skills education within a universal mental-health programme; it does not report an implemented programme or measure its effects. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0076]
Corporate Reputation, Identity and Trust — Wesselina Andria Johanna van der Merwe (chapter 5 of a 2013 University of Pretoria PhD thesis, Towards a Conceptual Model of the Relationship Between Corporate Trust and Corporate Reputation). This theoretical chapter proposes that trustworthy conduct and an ethical corporate identity inform stakeholder assessments of reputation, with trust treated as an outcome. The earlier attribution to Fombrun and Van Riel, whom the chapter cites, was incorrect; the chapter does not test the proposed model or HAO member trust. See the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0003]
Does Reputation Work to Discipline Corporate Misconduct? — Jonathan M. Karpoff (2012), chapter 18 in The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation, pp. 361–382. This review of empirical studies reports substantial estimated reputation losses for some misconduct affecting business counterparties, but negligible average losses in the environmental-violation studies discussed. The earlier research-library title was wrong; the chapter does not establish a general self-enforcing substitute for HAO governance. See the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0018]
The Building Blocks of Corporate Reputation: Definitions, Antecedents, Consequences — Charles J. Fombrun (2012), chapter 5 in The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation, pp. 94–113. This theoretical synthesis compares seven conceptual lenses and proposes an integrative reputation framework for future empirical testing; it does not measure the framework’s effects or test an HAO intervention. The generated claim set reuses one raw claim ID for two distinct statements. See the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0019]
Predicting Future Conflict Between Team-Members with Parameter-Free Models of Social Networks — Núria Rovira-Asenjo; Tània Gumí; Marta Sales-Pardo; Roger Guimerà (2013). Scientific Reports, 3, article 1999. In 16 chemical-engineering student teams, a network model ranked later changes in willingness to work together above a within-team null model; a structural-balance comparator did not. The survey proxy is narrower than observed conflict, and the study does not validate deployment in HAO teams. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0021]
Psychosocial Deprivation, Executive Functions, and the Emergence of Socio-Emotional Behavior Problems — Jennifer Martin McDermott; Sonya Troller-Renfree; Ross Vanderwert; Charles A. Nelson; Charles H. Zeanah; Nathan A. Fox (2013). Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, article 167. This follow-up analysis of the Bucharest Early Intervention Project examines flanker-task performance and error-monitoring measures in eight-year-old children. The abstract’s foster-care versus care-as-usual Pe claim is not matched by a reported direct significant comparison in the results; other reported associations are outcome- and group-specific. The study does not test HAO teams or adult member assessment. See the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0020]
Hebbian Learning and Predictive Mirror Neurons for Actions, Sensations and Emotions — Christian Keysers; Valeria Gazzola (2014). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 369, article 20130175. Labelled an opinion piece, it proposes a Hebbian account of how predictive mirror-like responses might develop and draws on earlier experimental work; it does not directly test that developmental account or HAO coordination. Two generated evidence snippets splice separate PDF columns, and the claim set remains quarantined. See the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0024]
Stable Conflict Resolution Styles and Commitment: Their Roles in Marital Relationship Self-Regulation — Rebecca Suzanne Boyd (2014). Brigham Young University master’s thesis. Using cross-sectional self-reports from 2,262 first-married individuals, it examines associations among self-classified conflict style, commitment and relationship self-regulation. The earlier bibliography’s authors were wrong. The study does not test workplace teams or HAO conflict procedures; its claimed validating-style advantage is narrower than the abstract suggests. See the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0025]
Cultures of Resilience: Ideas — Ezio Manzini and Jeremy Till, eds. (2015). London: Hato Press. ISBN 978-1-910239-10-0. This University of the Arts London project volume contains a shared base text on socio-technical resilience and separately authored contributions; the base text discusses diversity, redundancy, feedback and experimentation as possible characteristics of resilient systems. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0028]
To Have Control Over or to Be Free From Others? The Desire for Power Reflects a Need for Autonomy — Joris Lammers; Janka I. Stoker; Floor Rink; Adam D. Galinsky (2016). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(4), 498–512. Across nine studies, the authors report that autonomy, more than influence over others, is associated with the desire for power. This individual-level finding does not test HAO governance. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0078]
Hierarchical Rank and Principled Dissent: How Holding Higher Rank Suppresses Objection to Unethical Practices — Jessica A. Kennedy; Cameron Anderson (2017). Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 139, 30–49. The authors report lower principled dissent with higher rank across an archival survey and two experiments; the canonical PDF is a publisher preview without the full study methods or results. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0034]
The Psychology of Harmony and Harmonization: Advancing the Perspectives for the Psychology of Sustainability and Sustainable Development — Annamaria Di Fabio; Akira Tsuda (2018). Sustainability, 10(12), article 4726. This perspective proposes a psychological account of harmonisation involving oneself, others and the natural world; it is not an empirical evaluation of HAO groups or institutions. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0038]
Organizational Behavior — OpenStax, Rice University (2019). The archived PDF is this OpenStax textbook, not the differently titled work suggested by its canonical filename. Its copyright page declares CC BY 4.0 for that PDF; the current OpenStax web edition displays different reuse terms, so rights must be assessed by version before reuse. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0084]
The ‘Virtuous Cycle’: How to Create Compounding Successes — Shawn Achor (published 23 September 2019; updated 1 October 2019). SUCCESS magazine essay. Achor proposes reciprocal support and recognition as a “virtuous cycle” and illustrates the idea with hypothetical workplace examples. The archived article says research supports a happiness-before-success direction but identifies no study, methods or data; it is not empirical evidence for that claim or for HAO outcomes. Bounded primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0059]
Turning Vicious Cycles Into Virtuous Ones: the Potential for Schools to Improve the Life Course — Mitchell D. Wong; Karen Hunter Quartz; Marisa Saunders; Ben P. L. Meza; Saltanat Childress; Teresa E. Seeman; Rebecca N. Dudovitz (May 2022). Pediatrics 149, supplement 5, S1–S10. This synthesis proposes schools as platforms for coordinated education and health support; it does not test a HAO intervention. Several staged claim snippets are cross-column or reference-list artifacts. See the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0048]
Beyond polarization towards dynamic balance: harmony as the core of mental health — Antonella Delle Fave; Marié Philipina Wissing; Ingrid Brdar (13 September 2023). Frontiers in Psychology 14, 1177657. This “Hypothesis and Theory” article proposes a contextual and dynamic definition of mental health; it does not test HAO member outcomes. The staged claims contain cross-column fragments and a bibliography-only row; see the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0054]
Near-optimal Integration of the Magnitude Information of Time and Numerosity — Taku Otsuka; Yuko Yotsumoto (2023). Royal Society Open Science 10, article 230153. In two visual-judgement experiments with 42 volunteers, reliability-weighted integration approached a maximum-likelihood model more closely when time and dot-count information became available nearer together. Observed variability exceeded the model prediction in both experiments; the study does not establish optimal perception generally or test organisational decision-making. Bounded primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0052]
Gen Z job seekers should be ‘willing to do anything’, says Squarespace CMO Kinjil Mathur — Orianna Rosa Royle (20 July 2024). This Fortune interview reports Mathur’s career advice and her account of unpaid internship work; it does not measure outcomes or describe HAO member practice. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0094]
How FAST Feedback Boosts Performance — Jeffrey Fermin (18 January 2024 in the archived version; the current page displays a later date). This AllVoices practice article proposes frequent, accurate, specific and timely feedback; its performance claims do not establish an evaluated FAST intervention. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0061]
The Power of a Virtuous Cycle to Motivate Long-Term Goals — Jean Moroney (2021; publisher page metadata). This practice article proposes a short-term payoff, a doable step and a value-oriented debrief for sustaining effort; it does not establish that this routine is necessary or effective for HAO members. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0066]
Knowledge Brief: Basic Life Skills Curriculum — UNICEF Azerbaijan (issuing context; n.d.). This three-page brief describes a curriculum developed with Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Youth and Sport for young people; its life-skills definition is attributed to WHO. The audit handoff assigns an unverified date and coauthorship; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0117]
Building the Skills Adults Need for Life: A Guide for Practitioners — Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University (n.d.). A four-page practitioner guide on planning, focus, self-control, awareness and flexibility. The handoff’s 2016 publication date is not established by the PDF; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0107]

Legal Structures & Governance Instruments (8)

Choosing a Business Entity: A Guide for Worker Cooperatives — Camille Kerr (2014), Democracy at Work Institute. This US worker-cooperative guide compares entity and tax choices, liability, governance and capital access. Its chart is a historical overview, not current jurisdiction-specific legal advice; a categorical double-taxation callout does not account for the LLC tax elections the guide itself describes. Bounded primary-source spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0017]
Thinking about starting a worker co-op? Here are some questions to consider before meeting with a lawyer — Jenny Kassan (original-post URL dated 2010; PDF copy modified 2012). This one-page intake checklist poses 28 questions about jurisdiction, membership, governance, capital and tax concerns. It does not prescribe legal requirements or a HAO structure. Bounded claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0016]
Comparing Nonprofit and Cooperative Entities — University of Wisconsin–Madison Center for Cooperatives (n.d.). This Wisconsin-oriented bulletin distinguishes state incorporation from federal tax status. Its absolute distribution language and suggestion of a cooperative tax “exemption” require qualification; see the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [metadata incomplete] [icn-0040]
Essays on Dynamic Contracts — Nan Zhao (2021). Boston University doctoral dissertation. Its three formal models address delayed evaluation, fixed-wage screening and dynamic delegation under distinct information assumptions. The generated claims overextend a Chapter 1 observability assumption to the whole dissertation and omit a condition on its full-effort result. The models do not test HAO contracts or governance. See the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0045]
Application for Registration of INTEGRATED COOPERATIVE NETWORK — PROVIDE.IO LLC (2024). This document is an Assumed Business Name application e-filed with the Oregon Secretary of State on 22 April 2024; it does not specify HAO ownership or governance. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0002]
Contract Redlining — DealHub Experts (updated 27 December 2023 in the archived copy). This vendor glossary describes collaborative edits and version control during contract negotiation. Its categorical description of redlining as a necessary step before signing is not a legal requirement; the publisher’s current FAQ says redlining is not always needed. [icn-0062]
Contract Versioning — DealHub Experts; reviewed by Eyal Orgil (published 10 August 2023 in the archived copy). This vendor glossary describes tracking contract revisions, permissions and document versions. Its statements about enforceability and regulatory compliance are not independent legal authority. [icn-0063]
The Ultimate Guide to Company Structure Charts — Mark Little (29 March 2023, per Lexchart’s author archive). This practical article distinguishes ownership, governance and management charts and proposes a five-step method for drawing them. Its examples are chart-design guidance, not evidence for a HAO governance arrangement. [icn-0064]

Technology, DLT & Networks (7)

SOFROP: Self-Organizing and Fair Routing Protocol for Wireless Networks with Mobile Sensors and Stationary Actors — Mustafa İlhan Akbaş; Matthias R. Brust; Damla Turgut (2010). Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks, 456–463. The authors evaluate a routing protocol for mobile sensors and stationary actors through simulations of a particular wireless-network scenario. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0074]
A Mobile Community Service Platform Promoting Ubiquitous Collaboration — Kyungran Kang; Jungtae Lee; Kyoungwon Beak; Sungeun Park; Jaehwan Kim (2011). Ninth IEEE International Conference on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing, pp. 939–946. The authors propose a phone-and-server architecture for role-based mobile communities and diagram example interaction sequences. The paper does not report a user study or measure collaboration outcomes; four of five staged evidence quotations splice its two columns. Bounded primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0075]
WebGIS based community services architecture by griddization managements and crowdsourcing services — Haiyin Wang; Jianhua Wan; Zhe Zeng; Shengchuan Zhou (2016). IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 46, article 012048. The authors describe a WebGIS architecture for government community-service management in Huangdao District, Qingdao, with cloud-based service centres and mobile reporting. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0079]
A Flexible Design for Funding Public Goods — Vitalik Buterin; Zoë Hitzig; E. Glen Weyl (2019). Management Science, 65(11), 5171–5187. The canonical library PDF is the August 2020 arXiv revision, not the journal typesetting. It proposes quadratic finance under specified modelling assumptions; its deficit analysis qualifies the abstract’s optimality result. See the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0103]
Cooperatives: An Ownership Model for Digital Networks — Contributors affiliated with Orrick, Upside Cooperative and KPMG LLP (2023). The article proposes a cooperative ownership arrangement for digital networks and discusses conditional securities-law considerations; it is not a comprehensive compliance guide. Neither the staged “NSACoop” attribution nor the audit handoff’s a16z attribution appears in the PDF; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0105]
Neurotechnologies: The New Frontier for International Governance — Ricardo Chavarriaga; Jean-Marc Rickli; Federico Mantellassi (April 2023). Geneva Centre for Security Policy, Strategic Security Analysis, issue 29. This policy analysis surveys neurotechnology applications and governance proposals; it is not an OECD report or an empirical assessment of HAO. Primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0106]
The CrowdStrike Failure Was a Warning — Brian Klaas (21 July 2024). The Atlantic, Ideas. This opinion essay uses the outage to argue for redundancy, diversity and slack in interconnected systems; it does not test those measures or HAO resilience. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0095]

Other (Operating Models, Beyond Budgeting, Business Practice & Strategic Disclosure) (18)

Strategic Disclosure in the Patent System — Douglas Lichtman; Scott Baker; Kate Kraus (2000). Vanderbilt Law Review 53(6), 2175–2218. The authors model when firms leading or trailing a patent race might publicly disclose research to affect a rival’s patent prospects, and consider whether private bargaining might displace disclosure. Its discussion of US first-to-invent priority and the former 35 USC § 102(b) describes the law at publication, not the current patent regime. [icn-0008]
The Fallacy of Premature Optimization — Randall Hyde (2009). ACM Ubiquity 10(3), 24 February–2 March. A software-engineering opinion essay arguing that performance should be considered during system design while premature micro-optimisation is avoided. It offers no HAO-specific evidence. The essay’s attribution of the “97%” passage to Tony Hoare is not established by the cited article; Donald Knuth printed it in his own 1974 essay. Two staged rows quote an embedded passage by Charles Cook rather than Hyde’s own words. Bounded primary-PDF review (review retained privately). [icn-0011]
The Evolution of a Management Accounting Idea: The Case of Beyond Budgeting — Sebastian Becker; Martin Messner; Utz Schäffer (19 February 2009 manuscript; repository wrapper labels January 2010). A qualitative genealogy based on publications, interviews and observation examines the tension between Beyond Budgeting as a complete management model and adaptation of its component practices. The authors offer one interpretive explanation for its limited diffusion, not a causal or HAO-specific test. The generated summary misstates their conclusion; see the full primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0072]
Operating Models: Delivering on Strategy and Optimizing Processes — Annie Murphy; Jamie Kirwin; Khalid Abdul Razak (© 2016 Ernst & Young LLP). This EY practitioner guide frames an operating model as a bridge between strategy and operations and proposes adaptable design elements. Its performance benefits are argued rather than measured, and the staged claim set contains a duplicate-ID collision; see the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0032]
Introducing the Next-Generation Operating Model — Digital McKinsey (PDF colophon: January 2017). This is an article collection. The staged claims mostly come from “The next-generation operating model for the digital world” (printed pp. 8–15), whose canonical-edition byline names Albert Bollard, Sanjay Kaniyar, Elixabete Larrea, Alex Singla and Rohit Sood; one claim comes from the introduction. The prior Bucy–Hall–Yakola attribution does not match this PDF. The collection offers practitioner arguments and anonymized cases, not a test of HAO; see the primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0033]
Beyond Budgeting — Vassili Joannidès de Lautour (2018). In Strategic Management Accounting, Volume I: Aligning Strategy, Operations and Finance (pp. 217–270). Palgrave Macmillan. The chapter analyses criticisms of master budgets and describes Beyond Budgeting as an alternative management philosophy. The ten generated claims mostly reproduce the author’s conceptual critiques, not measured effects; the four-month budget-preparation figure is a rounded secondary estimate. See the full primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately) and earlier numerical spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0082]
Understanding Why Beyond Budgeting Has Not Been Widely Adopted — Phil Hudson (2012). Doctor of Business Administration thesis, Kingston University. An exploratory survey of 185 management accountants and 50 follow-up interviews found partial uptake of component practices among participants while fixed budgets remained common. The author cautions that the sample cannot support generalisation. The canonical PDF’s 2019-09 filename does not give the thesis date. See the full primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0102]
An Empirical Investigation of Beyond Budgeting Practices — Michal Matějka; Kenneth A. Merchant; Winnie O’Grady (April 2020 preprint; journal version 2021). An exploratory survey compares 80 self-reported partial or full adopters with 121 non-adopters drawn from Beyond Budgeting Round Table contacts. The convenience sample and self-reported measures limit generalization; observed associations do not establish causation. The canonical PDF’s 2022-05 filename does not give the paper date. See the full primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0085]
An Exploratory Study on Corporate Governance From Neuro-Governance Lenses in the Malaysian Context — Larisa Ivascu; Codruta Daniela Pavel; Muddassar Sarfraz; Benedict Valentine Arulanandam; Hong Yip Tan (2022). Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 911907. A qualitative study reporting 21 structured interviews about corporate misconduct and related decision-making; its literature-review examples and interview opinions do not establish general human-behaviour laws. The audit handoff misidentified the authors; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0104]
Beyond budgeting in practice — Agnes Burell; Anna Mattsson (2022). Master’s thesis, Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University. A four-case qualitative study based on eight semi-structured interviews. Although its abstract calls the cases retail organisations, one is a pharmaceutical-company pilot. The staged claims[] extraction covers the abstract and background/theory sections, not the empirical findings; see the full primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0086]
How Operating Models Must Evolve for the Future — Steve Basili (EY; 5 April 2022). EY-sponsored MIT Sloan Management Review article on proposed operating-model changes for consumer-products companies. It draws on a separately reported survey but does not itself establish that these recommendations improve performance. The canonical PDF is a printout of the sponsored web page, not the survey report; see the primary-source spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0060]
Iterative Business Model Innovation: A Conceptual Process Model and Tools for Incumbents — Nadine Bachmann; Herbert Jodlbauer (2023). Journal of Business Research, 168, 114177. A structured narrative review of 47 publications develops a six-phase conceptual process model with 23 activities and 38 tools; it does not test HAO outcomes. Five staged claim rows are reference-list or author-biography artifacts; see the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0088]
Strategic Disclosure and Investor Loss Aversion — Zeqiong Huang; Joseph D. Piotroski; Chloe L. Xie (November 2023 working paper). A stylised public-company model predicts disclosure of mildly bad earnings news and withholding of mildly good news under specified investor-loss-aversion conditions. It does not test HAO governance. The staged source record bears an unrelated title and agent-based summary; see the full primary-PDF claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0055]
Guide to the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (SEBoK), version 2.10 — SEBoK Editorial Board; Nicole Hutchison, editor in chief (released 6 May 2024). This PDF extraction of the SEBoK wiki covers systems-engineering foundations, management, applications and related disciplines; its articles have separate contributors. The version and editorial responsibility are documented in the primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0093]
Integration vs Implementation: The Value of Each — DecisivEdge (site byline “The Story Dev”; 2 October 2023). This company blog article distinguishes IT implementation from systems integration. Its claim that 70% of CRM implementations fail names no supporting study and is not used as evidence here. [icn-0090]
(Pro-)Social Learning and Strategic Disclosure — Roland Bénabou and Nikhil Vellodi (14 May 2024 draft). In their sequential-experimentation model, disclosure is polarised and positively selected when prior uncertainty is large; that conditional result is not an observed HAO outcome. A revised journal article appeared in 2025. Bounded primary-PDF spot check (review retained privately). [icn-0091]
Strategic Disclosure with Reputational Concerns — Wenhao Zhang (2024). Journal of Mathematical Economics 111, 102945. The author models an expert’s disclosure incentives when honesty and reputation matter. The canonical PDF is a publisher-page printout with the abstract and introduction but only snippets of the model, analysis and conclusion; it is not the full article. Its theoretical result is not evidence of HAO outcomes. See the bounded primary-source claim review (review retained privately). [icn-0057]
What is an Operating Model? — Quantive (publisher; no named author or publication date; archived 18 April 2024). This company article distinguishes operational design from a business model’s commercial activities and sets out six operating-model components. Its account of a “Modern Operating Model” describes Quantive’s proposed approach, not independent evidence of its results. [metadata incomplete] [icn-0065]

5. Excluded

Two documents in the source PDF collection were excluded from the research library above as non-bibliographic:

icn-0096 — a CliffsNotes study guide for Lord of the Flies. Confirmed by its own machine-extracted title (“Cliffsnotes Lord Of The Flies”) and summary (literary analysis of the novel). Unrelated to the corpus’s subject matter. Named here so a later pass does not re-add it.
icn-0116 — a Docusaurus site-configuration file for the provide.io governance website. A PDF snapshot of a docusaurus.config file (site URL, organization name, docs and blog paths), confirmed by its machine-extracted title (“provide.io governance”) and summary (site-configuration details). A build artifact, not a reference work. Named here so a later pass does not re-add it.

A full filename scan for junk-pattern keywords (cliffsnotes, sparknotes, wikipedia, test, sample, lorem, placeholder) across all 118 canonical documents found no other candidates; these two are believed to be the complete set within this collection.

The source collection’s index was subsequently repaired. icn-0118 now has a row in indexes/library-index.csv, including its canonical-file checksum and source listing; the index contains 118 data rows. This document remains one of the 116 works included above, because two non-bibliographic files are excluded. The prior absence of this row was a catalog gap, not a reason to omit the work.