The Relationship Between the Managerial Skills and Results of "Performance Evaluation "Tool Among Nursing Managers in Teaching Hospitals of Iran University of Medical Science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Performance of different organizations, such as hospitals is mainly influenced by their managers' performance. Nursing managers have an important role in hospital performance and their managerial skills can improve the quality of the services. Hence, the present study was conducted in order to assess the relationship between the managerial skills and the results of their performance evaluation in Teaching Hospitals of Iran University of Medical Science in 2013. The research used the cross sectional method in 2013. It was done by distributing a managerial skills assessment questionnaire, with close-ended questions in 5 choice Likert scale, among 181 managers and head nurses of hospitals of Iran university of Medical Sciences; among which 131 answered the questions. Another data collection tools was a forms to record evaluation marks from the personnel records. We used Pearson and Spearman correlation tests and SPSS for analysis and description (frequency, mean and standard deviation). Results showed that the managerial skills of the nursing mangers were fair (2.57 out of 5) and the results of the performance evaluation were in a good condition (98.44). The mangers' evaluation results and the managerial skills scores were not in a meaningful correlation (r=0.047 np=0.856). The research showed no correlation between different domains of managerial skills and the performance evaluation marks: decision making skills (r=0.074 and p=0.399), leadership (correlation coefficient 0.028 and p=0.654), motivation (correlation coefficient 0.118 and p=0.163), communication (correlation coefficient 0.116 and p=0.122), systematic thinking (correlation coefficient 0.028 and p=0.828), time management (correlation coefficient 0.077 and p=0.401) and strategic thinking (correlation coefficient 0.041 and p=0.756). Lack of any correlation and relation between managers' managerial skills and their performance evaluation results shows need to a fundamental revision at managers' performance evaluation form.
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 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 | 0.103 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".