The Impact of organizational culture and Training on Leadership Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose : The purpose of this research paper is the impact of organizational culture and training on leadership development and makes the detailed study of organizational culture and training in the context of leadership development. Design/methodology/approach: A mixed methods approach (e.g. both qualitative as well as quantitative) was utilized in order to carry out this study. The questionnaire consisted of 26 statements which make reference to the main functions of organizational leadership development, such as, Training and Organization Culture. The gap analysis method was used for the questionnaire items. Finally, complimentary to the questionnaires, it was decided to have on-site visitations with “real people” on the ground. Findings: The study shows that leadership training programs and organizational culture are tools which are used for Leadership development. Practical implication: This practical evidence provides guidelines for Human Resource researchers and managers for providing training and organizational culture which effect on leadership development Limitation of research: The major limitation of this research is cost, time and research culture. Originality/value: Leadership training programs and organizational culture need to be supplemented with Leadership development activities and a more systematic follow-up process after completion.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 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".