An empirical examination of both mediated and moderated effects on followers' commitment to change to the organisational BSC approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kaplan and Norton (2001) presented their Balanced Scorecard (BSC) for the measurement of corporate performance and the setting of measures for employees' performance and adaptation to fit into corporate dynamism. Studies show that when a leader is unable to raise his/her followers' level of commitment to change to the organisational BSC approach, the corporation will have difficulty in achieving its mission. The commitment to change to the BSC approach provides for long-run growth and healthy business performance. This study was designed to empirically examine the effect of both mediated and moderated relations for the transformational leadership process on the followers' level of commitment to change to the organisational BSC approach. The results of the findings indicated that: there was a positive association between the transformational leader's people-oriented behaviour and the followers' level of trust, but a negative relationship between the followers' level of trust and their commitment to change to the BSC approach; the level of trust mediated the association between the leader's transformational task- and people-oriented behaviour and the followers' level of commitment to change to the organisational BSC approach. The findings suggest that the followers' attitude towards the leader, such as their level of general satisfaction, should be identified as a moderating effect/contingency approach.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".