MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145577536 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2012.11.022

A study on organizational culture, structure and information technology as three KM enablers: A case study in five Iranian medical and healthcare research centers

2012· article· en· W2145577536 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ali Khalghani, Hamideh Reshadatjoo, Mahdi Iran-nejad-parizi

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKnowledge Management and Sharing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careKnowledge managementOrganizational cultureBusinessInformation technologyComputer sciencePublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates organizational structure, culture, and information technology as knowledge management (KM) infrastructural capabilities, and compares their significance and status quo in five medical research centers in Tehran, Iran. Objectives of this research were pursued by employing two statistical methods, regression analysis and Friedman test. Included in the study were 135 people (researchers and support staff) from five medical and healthcare research centers of Tehran. A survey questionnaire including 23 questions was utilized to examine organizational structure, culture and information technology indicators. And another 12 questions examined KM effectiveness. The Friedman test indicated that in terms of their status quo, the three studied KM enablers are at different conditions, with organizational culture having the best (mean rank=1.79) and IT the worst (mean rank=2.14) status. Moreover, it was revealed by regression analysis that organizational structure is believed to have the most significant impact (Beta= 0.397) on the effectiveness of knowledge management initiatives, while information technology gained the least perceived impact (Beta= 0.176).

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicKnowledge Management and SharingFrench-language works237,207