MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094875356 · doi:10.1108/01437730310485815

Predictors of employees’ perceptions of knowledge sharing cultures

2003· article· en· W2094875356 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

VenueLeadership & Organization Development Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKnowledge Management and Sharing
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge sharingModerationPerceptionOrganizational culturePsychologyKnowledge managementSocial psychologyBusinessPublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated whether organizational factors such as employees’ perceptions of management’s support for knowledge sharing, their perceptions of the organization’s social interaction culture, the organization’s size, and the organization’s available knowledge sharing technology, as well as whether individual factors such as age, gender, and organizational tenure had a significant impact on employees’ perceptions of a knowledge sharing culture. New measures to assess employees’ perceptions of management’s support for knowledge sharing, their perceptions of the organization’s social interaction culture, and the perceived knowledge sharing culture were developed. We found that perceptions of management’s support for knowledge sharing, and perceptions of a positive social interaction culture were both significant predictors of a perceived knowledge sharing culture. In addition, gender was a significant moderator: female participants required a more positive social interaction culture before they would perceive a knowledge sharing culture as positive as that perceived by their male counterparts.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.304
Teacher spread0.241 · 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