Factors Impact Business Graduates Employability: Evidence from Academicians and Employers in Kuwait
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to explore the importance that academicians and employers attach to factors impact business graduates employability in Kuwait. Four categories of employability factors were used in the current study covering graduates knowledge, soft skills, personal abilities and working with groups. A questionnaire that contained these factors was distributed to academicians as well as employers and they were asked to express the level of importance they assign to variables within each of these categories. The results of the analyses pointed to differences in the levels of importance academicians and employers attach to employability factors covered in the questionnaire, indicating that current programs offered by business schools in Kuwait are not responding to market needs. While employers attach high levels of importance to graduates knowledge, soft skills and personal abilities, academicians do not assign the same levels of importance to these factors. However, academicians and employers appeared to be consistent in the level of importance they attach to the working within group factor. Business schools are requested to develop their academic programs in order to respond to market's needs. This requires changes in the contents of these programs (input) together with teaching instruments in order to improve output and satisfy employers demand.
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 | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".