MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063147447 · doi:10.1080/00223980903218216

Organizational Change Questionnaire–Climate of Change, Processes, and Readiness: Development of a New Instrument

2009· article· en· W2063147447 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Psychology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyOrganizational changeContext (archaeology)Organisation climateProcess (computing)Climate changeApplied psychologyOrganization developmentKnowledge managementSocial psychologyPublic relationsComputer sciencePolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT On the basis of a step-by-step procedure (see T. R. Hinkin, 1998 Hinkin, T. R. 1998. A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1: 104–121. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), the authors discuss the design and evaluation of a self-report battery (Organizational Change Questionnaire–Climate of Change, Processes, and Readiness; OCQ–C, P, R) that researchers can use to gauge the internal context or climate of change, the process factors of change, and readiness for change. The authors describe 4 studies used to develop a psychometrically sound 42-item assessment tool that researchers can administer in organizational settings. More than 3,000 organizational members from public and private sector organizations participated in the validation procedure of the OCQ–C, P, R. The information obtained from the analyses yielded 5 climate-of-change dimensions, 3 process-of-change dimensions, and 3 readiness-for-change dimensions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.239 · 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