The Relationship between Level of Architect’s Professional Competencies and Client Satisfaction Level
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identifying key competencies and how they relate to crucial outcomes such as client satisfaction has become a dominant area receiving intensive attention through research in recent times in organisational management, services consulting and construction. The evaluation of the link between client satisfaction and competencies is considered crucial to the success of consulting assignments in today’s sophisticated, large-scale, risky and adversarial construction project environment. Yet the relationship between the competencies of the project team and the satisfaction level of clients has rarely been examined on professional architects in the construction industry. The objective of this study is to examine the relationship between the professional competencies of architects and client satisfaction level in the Ghanaian construction industry. Using a combined multiple regression and Pearson correlation analysis on survey data, the findings reveal a strong positive relationship between design and management competencies of architects and client satisfaction level with design competencies being a greater predictor of client satisfaction level. The results offer foundation for architects’ continuous professional development and training towards performance improvement.
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 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 | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it