MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154781387

Relationship Between Job Satisfaction and Business Excellence: Empirical Evidence from Hospital Nursing Departments

2006· article· en· W2154781387 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Özkan Tütüncü, Deniz Küçükusta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative International Management · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellenceImplementationJob satisfactionQuality (philosophy)Total quality managementBusinessCustomer satisfactionMarketingManagementComputer scienceService (business)EconomicsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Business excellence is important in terms of encouraging successful quality implementations, disseminating the result of such implementations to society, making quality culture widespread, creating a basis for comparison of quality implementations, and directing the quality implementer to continuous improvement. Excellence models affect performance and help organizations achieve organizational excellence. Furthermore, employee satisfaction is another concern of organizational excellence. The measurement of job satisfaction has become an important issue in TQM. In this respect, the extent to which employees are satisfied with what they are responsible for may directly influence the level of customer satisfaction with their services and products. The main purpose of the study is to determine the relationship between business excellence and job satisfaction. In order to reach this goal, a survey that contains Job Descriptive Index with 5 factors and EFQM Criteria with 6 factors is applied to different nursing departments of two research hospitals. Both hospitals are in the business excellence process. Data obtained in the study has been analyzed at the base of multivariate data analysis and the results show that the canonical correlation between job satisfaction and business excellence model is significant. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are also discussed in the paper.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative International ManagementSame topicQuality and Supply ManagementFrench-language works237,207