The Effect of Knowledge Management Uses on Total Quality Management Practices: A Theoretical Perspective
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have showed that selecting the influential factors related to knowledge management (KM) uses and total quality management (TQM) practices has been always a critical task for researchers. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there are few papers that review the concept of knowledge management uses on total quality management practices. Based on a comprehensive literature review, this study aims to highlight the important factors related to knowledge management uses on total quality management practices. This study identified knowledge acquisition, knowledge storage, knowledge transfer and knowledge application as the most important knowledge management uses. While customer satisfaction, training and employees education, commitment of top management, team work and continuous improvement were considered to be the most important TQM practices. This study provides a holistic picture for future researchers in selecting the popular related KM uses and TQM practices. This will help them build a strong knowledge in this area in order to develop theoretical basis for their future research.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it