MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162900342 · doi:10.5430/bmr.v2n3p60

Leadership Practices and Talent Turnover: Study on Yemeni Organizations

2013· article· en· W2162900342 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
H. Al-Sharafi, Ismi Rajiani

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness and Management Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoyaltyTurnover intentionJob satisfactionTurnoverLeadership styleTalent managementBusinessPsychologyPublic relationsMarketingSocial psychologyManagementPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To date, many studies have been conducted in order to identify factors that have a great impact on employees’ turnover. A number of studies have shown that leadership style influences employees’ job satisfaction and their turnover intention. However, very few studies have dealt with the relationship between Kouzes and Posner (1987)’s leadership practices and employees’ turnover. This study aims to identify the role that Leadership practices play in enhancing loyalty and at the same time reducing turnover intention among the most valuable employees - talent employees - in telecommunication sector in Yemen. In addition, current study also aims at examine whether the relationship between leadership practices and turnover intention is mediated by the talent employees’ job satisfaction. Using the response of 280 employees working in the five Yemeni telecommunication organizations, the results indicated that there is a negative relationship between overall leadership practices and turnover intentions among talent employees, four out of five practices were negatively correlated with talent employees’ turnover intention. Moreover, job satisfaction founded to be a mediator of the relationship between leadership practices and turnover intentions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations14
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness and Management ResearchSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207