Analysis of the Relationship between Strategic Management and Human Resources Management in Informatics Services Company of Tehran Province
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concepts of strategic management and human resource management has long been of interest of researchers and various studies have been done on the relationship between these concepts. In general, researchers believe that the strategic management of the organization leaves a significant role in human resource management. In this regard, the present study is an attempt to examine this relationship in the form of a conceptual model includes 12 hypotheses that have been tested and evaluated in the informatics services company with a population of 740 people. In this study, the concept of strategic management in the form of three basic dimensions: 1) strategic planning, 2) execution of strategy, and 3) assessment strategy has been defined. Human resource management also consists of four main dimensions: 1) attraction and retain the human resources, 2) perceived organizational support, 3) normative and affective commitment, and 4) Optional behavior. The results showed that between strategic management and human resource management are positively and significantly correlated. As the results showed three independent variables of the study were able to predict more than half of dependent variable changes of human resource management, among which the variable of evaluation of strategy had the greatest role.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".