Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to use information culture assessment tools (from work by Curry and Moore) to examine the information culture within a regulated, government environment. In particular, it aims to study the relationship between records management training provided to staff, staff self‐perceptions of records management competencies and compliance with a formal records management program. Design/methodology/approach The survey employs a questionnaire to gather the data from a provincial government ministry in Ontario, Canada. A questionnaire was used for data collection from a sample of 350 records management personnel from a population of 3,510 in five divisions of the ministry. A total of 207 participants responded and the copies of their questionnaire were found valid for analysis. The response rate realized was 66.7 percent. Findings The results from this study show that the there is a potential relationship between formal training delivered to staff, and the self‐perceived level of records management competency, namely that the more training staff receive, the more staff perceive the need for further training, and the greater level of compliance with the records management program. However, as the records management training strategy is informal in nature, it is difficult to determine a holistic influence of the training program on the organization's information culture. Research limitations/implications The study is based on one ministry with an informal training records management strategy in place. The findings may not apply to organizations where there is a more formal training strategy. The findings should also be tested in private sector organizational settings. Practical implications Knowledge and understanding of the features of information culture will assist with identifying gaps in addressing the challenges of organizational record management training and its effect on compliance with organizational information and record management programs. Originality/value This research adds to the body of knowledge about information culture and user‐information behavior, particularly in regards to connections between training and compliance in government organizations. This paper provides evidence from an original study.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".