Investigating characteristics of organizational culture
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
Studying the behavior of members of a firm is considered as the primary step in understanding the organization's culture. In fact, it is always essential to study organizations' culture when a new action is about to occur. In fact, by leveraging culture, it is becoming easier to accomplish other tasks within organizations. This paper presents an empirical investigation to determine important factors influencing organizational culture in food industry. The proposed study has adapted a questionnaire based on Denison organizational culture dimensions and distributed it among different groups of employees who worked for one of Iranian food maker in city of Zahedan, Iran. Cronbach alphas for job involvement, consistency, compatibility and mission are 0.786, 0.779, 0.707 and 0.908, respectively. The results indicate that dimensions of job involvement (3.31) and organizational compatibility (3.16) are in better position compared with dimensions of consistency (3.14) and mission (3.11). The study does not find any significance difference between in internal-external focus. In other words, the organization has paid sufficient attention to internal as well as external affairs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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