MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061568515 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v2n2p115

Assessing Knowledge Sharing Behaviour among Employees in SMEs: An Empirical Study

2009· article· en· W2061568515 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKnowledge Management and Sharing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge sharingBusinessKnowledge managementKey (lock)Test (biology)MarketingEmpirical researchPerceptionSurvey data collectionPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to present and tests the key factors of knowledge sharing behavior of employees in the SMEs in Malaysia. A survey was designed and interview conducted with employees in the manufacturing companies from Melaka and Johor states. Survey questions designed from the literature to examine employee perceptions of all variables were identified. Data from 305 respondents were used to validate the measures and test our research model. The results of the study show that reward system, culture, trust and technology are the four key factors which influencing the knowledge sharing behavior in the firms. Finally, the recommendation for HR executives are discussed in this research may help the firms in guiding their efforts to build knowledge based firms in Malasia.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.253
GPT teacher head0.540
Teacher spread0.288 · 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