Organizational factors’ effects on the success of e-learning systems and organizational benefits: An empirical study in Taiwan
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>E-learning development for enterprises is still in its infancy in that scholars are still working on identifying the critical success factors for e-learning in organizational contexts. This study presents a framework considering how organizational factors affect the quality and service of e-learning systems and how these factors influence organizational benefits in the view of IS success model and resource-based theory. A questionnaire survey of 120 Taiwanese companies was performed to validate the framework. The results show that top management support, information security policy, and institutional policy are positively related to system quality, while top management support, organizational learning culture, and institutional policy are positively related to system service. Additionally, system service is significantly related to organizational benefits. Our model provides two novel aspects of e-learning study. Firstly, we extend IS success model by incorporating four organizational factors as antecedences influencing system quality and system service. Secondly, the model is framed and examined on an organizational level, which provides a top-down view for managers when designing and implementing e-learning systems in the organizational context.</p>
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.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it