MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046591383 · doi:10.1177/1038411105058706

Human resource management practices and affective organizational commitment: A comparison of Chinese employees in a state-owned enterprise and a joint venture

2005· article· en· W2046591383 on OpenAlexaff
Baosheng Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia Pacific Journal of Human Resources · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessOrganizational commitmentHuman resource managementJob satisfactionJoint ventureInternational joint ventureGermanBusiness administrationChinaAntecedent (behavioral psychology)MarketingManagementPsychologyEconomicsSocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated influences on employee satisfaction with HRM systems and affective organizational commitment in a Sino-German joint venture and a state-owned enterprise in China. Employees in the joint venture were found to be significantly more satisfied with their organization’s HRM practices than were employees in the state-owned enterprise. In turn, employee satisfaction with HRM practices was found to have a more significant influence on affective commitment in the joint venture than in the state-owned enterprise. The Chinese human-heartedness cultural value was found to be an antecedent of employee affective commitment but influenced satisfaction of employees in regards to only some of the HRM practices in a state-owned enterprise. Implications for strategic HRM theory and changes in Chinese HRM systems are discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations96
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsia Pacific Journal of Human ResourcesSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207