MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1585730397 · doi:10.5539/ass.v11n21p102

Influence of Organizational Leadership on Knowledge Transfer in Construction

2015· article· en· W1585730397 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katun M. Idris, Kherun Nita Ali, Aliagha U. Godwin

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinational corporationKnowledge managementOrganizational learningKnowledge transferStructural equation modelingBusinessOrganizational performanceProcess (computing)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Organizations are becoming more cognizant that transferring the supremacy of knowledge in business is precarious to attaining reasonable modifications. This research investigates the significant role of organizational leadership on knowledge transfer in the multinational construction organization in Nigeria. Thus, this research was based on the multinational construction organization as a result of their technological advancement on knowledge management, knowledge transfer and development process. The research study adopted empirically validated measures’ variables and established a hypothetical framework that links organizational leadership with knowledge transfer variables. 220 survey questionnaires were distributed to knowledge workers of 35 multinational construction organization, and the research validated the framework with structural equation modeling (SEM). The factor’s loadings for the variables measures were significant and Cronbash Alpha factors of 0.903 and 0.747 for organizational leadership and knowledge transfer respectively was achieved. The research finding display that organizational leadership demonstrated significant influence on knowledge transfer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.143
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207