MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2475250713 · doi:10.5539/ass.v12n7p1

Moderating Role of the Transformational Leadership in the Relationship between HRM Practices and Performance: A Study of ICT Companies of Malaysia

2016· article· en· W2475250713 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nazanin Mansouri

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformational leadershipModerationStaffingExtant taxonPsychologyHuman resource managementTraining and developmentInformation and Communications TechnologyBusinessManagementKnowledge managementPolitical scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper primarily aims to highlight that transformational leadership influences the relationship between human resource management (HRM) practices. Extant research studies have revealed that HRM practices have noticeable potential to increase employees and organizations performance. However, this study proposes transformational leadership as moderator of the relationship between HRM practices and organization’s performance. Prime HRM practices of this study consists of training, staffing, performance evaluation, reward system, and participation while transformational leadership have five components namely, vision, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, personal recognition, and supportive leadership. With the purpose of emphasizing on the significance of underlying variables of this study, research problem is linked to Information and Communication Technology (ICT) companies in Malaysia.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.196 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207