MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093615113 · doi:10.5539/ijms.v6n6p118

Organizational Measures as Key to Success in e-Learning on Coporrate Intranet: The Case of a Company in Cameroon

2014· article· en· W2093615113 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tchuente Monique, Henri Wamba

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marketing Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntranetKey (lock)Flexibility (engineering)Knowledge managementUnderpinningProcess (computing)BusinessDropout (neural networks)E learningOrganizational learningMarketingCritical success factorComputer scienceProcess managementManagementThe InternetEngineeringEconomicsWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article studies the key factors underpinning the success of e-Learning on corporate intranet. Indeed, theoretically, e-Learning has many avantages such as time and location flexibility for learners and teachers, the possibility to personnalize the learning process, the potential for establishment of a community of collaboration between learners and facilities for assessing and monitoring them. However in practice, e-Learning projects post rather mixed outcomes and record very high dropout rates. This raises the question of the key factors that influence the success of corporate e-Learning projects. To address this concern in the particular case of corporate intranet e-Learning projects, we have proposed a theoretical framework that combines the Davis model for user acceptance of a technology, and the Brillet model for effective implementation thereof. Our analysis shows clearly that organizational measures are key factors for the success of e-Learning projects. This theoretical result is confirmed by an experimental study to introduce e-learning in a company in Cameroon.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marketing StudiesSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207