MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007044490 · doi:10.1108/13620431111107801

Battling the war for talent: an application in a military context

2011· article· en· W2007044490 on OpenAlexaff
Bert Schreurs, Fariya Syed

Bibliographic record

VenueCareer Development International · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEmployer Branding and e-HRM
Canadian institutionsGouvernement du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyContext (archaeology)Perspective (graphical)OriginalityValue (mathematics)Human resource managementTask (project management)PerceptionSocial psychologyJob analysisProcess (computing)Resource (disambiguation)Knowledge managementApplied psychologyManagementJob satisfactionComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to introduce a comprehensive new recruitment model that brings together research findings in the different areas of recruitment. This model may serve as a general framework for further recruitment research, and is intended to support Human Resource managers in developing their recruitment policy. To highlight its utility, how the model can be applied to describe the recruitment process of the military is exemplified. Design/methodology/approach The model is developed based on an extensive search for published studies on employee recruitment and on the efforts of the members of the NATO Task Group on Recruitment and Retention of Military Personnel. Findings The model proposes that individuals' cognitions (beliefs, perceptions, expectations) influence job pursuit behavior, via influencing job pursuit attitudes and intentions. Individuals' cognitions are shaped by information about job and organizational characteristics. Job/organizational information can be obtained from sources that are or are not under the direct control of the organization. Finally, several inter‐individual difference variables (e.g. values, needs) are proposed to moderate the relationships depicted in the model. Originality/value The model extends previous recruitment models through its integrated focus on both the applicant's and organization's perspective, its recognition of the multiphased nature of recruitment, and its applicability to real‐life recruitment contexts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations26
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCareer Development InternationalSame topicEmployer Branding and e-HRMFrench-language works237,207