MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037876040 · doi:10.1108/09696471111123289

Improving service delivery: Investigating the role of information sharing, job characteristics, and employee satisfaction

2011· article· en· W2037876040 on OpenAlexaff
Nick Bontis, David A. Richards, Alexander Serenko

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Learning Organization · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKnowledge Management and Sharing
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob satisfactionKnowledge managementCustomer satisfactionEmployee engagementService qualityService delivery frameworkBusinessInformation sharingNomological networkAutonomyService (business)MarketingPsychologyComputer sciencePublic relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this study is to propose and test a model designed to investigate the impact of job characteristics, employee satisfaction, and information sharing on two key indicators of quality service delivery, such as worker perceptions of their efficiency and customer focus. Design/methodology/approach During the project, 9,060 employees of a large national telecommunications organization in North America provided information in two surveys six months apart. The model was tested by using the PLS (Partial Least Squares) procedure. Findings The results found support for the proposed model, indicating that autonomy and challenging work contribute to employee satisfaction, and that employee satisfaction and information sharing relate to greater reported efficiency and customer focus. The results and their implications are discussed. Research limitations/implications The key limitation of this project is that the suggested model was tested in only one organization in one industry. In future, the nomological validity of the model should be confirmed in other settings. Practical implications The findings suggest that HR departments should cooperate with IT departments to promote high‐quality service delivery. Originality/value Whereas HR is traditionally the domain of employee satisfaction initiatives, it is the IT department that typically spearheads knowledge management initiatives. By coordinating these two ventures together, and aligning their goals, senior managers will be able to realize more favorable outcomes.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations71
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Learning OrganizationSame topicKnowledge Management and SharingFrench-language works237,207