MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048209587 · doi:10.1109/itmc.2012.6306413

IT professionals: Maximizing engagement in the rapidly changing business environment

2012· article· en· W2048209587 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Linda M. Pittenger, Sheri Perelli, Toni M. Somers

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Technology Management Conference · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisengagement theoryCompassionEmployee engagementPsychologyWork (physics)Public relationsWork engagementBusinessPolitical scienceMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compared to the general employee population - only half of which is engaged at work [1] - IT employees fare worse. Just 26% report full engagement and 22% outright disengagement [2] with their jobs. Surprisingly, however, IT employee engagement has been largely ignored as a focus of scholarly research. To address this gap in the literature, we examined the relationship between IT workers' engagement and their work environment. Specifically, we sought to explain how organizational environment is affected by the behavioral competencies of IT professionals and their capacity for role breadth. Survey data from 795 IT managers and individual contributors in the United States and Canada revealed two competencies - Achievement Orientation and Influencing Others - powerfully impact environment and that three key features of the environment - vision, compassion and overall positive mood - influence IT professionals' engagement with work.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Technology Management ConferenceSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207