MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343203466 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v8n5p271

Application of Motivation in Nigeria Construction Industry: Factor Analysis Approach

2016· article· en· W2343203466 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Afuye Funso, Letema Sammy, Munala Gerryshom

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvertimeExploratory factor analysisJob securityDescriptive statisticsDismissalProductivityRetrenchmentBusinessWorkforceMarketingOperations managementActuarial scienceEconomicsLabour economicsStatisticsEngineeringService (business)MathematicsEconomic growthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivation application by industry players is expedient for effective workforce towards meeting organisation goal. This study identified motivation variables in accordance with Herzberg theory. This was used to survey factors that influence supervisors’ productivity as well as determining its application by contractors in Nigeria construction firms. Quantitative research design approach was employed with same questionnaire to supervisors and contractors. 174 questionnaires were administered to supervisors and 105 was filled and returned which constitute 60% success rate. Moreover, 16 questionnaires were administered to contractors and 12 was filled and returned which constitute 75% success rate. Analysis was done by descriptive statistics and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). The outcome reveals that supervisors are mostly motivated by job security with mean score of 4.11 and standard deviation of .95 and least motivated by overtime with mean value of 2.82 and standard deviation of 1.14. Moreover, the most potent factor influencing their productivity is financial reward. However, the analysis of contractors’ application of motivation reveals that they operate non financial reward. The paper recommends relating motivation application to workers needs as a way of enhancing productivity in the sector. Furthermore, enactment of employment protection legislations for job security should be enhanced to guide against arbitrary dismissal or retrenchment in the sector.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicManagement and Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207