MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588873388 · doi:10.5430/jms.v8n1p37

How to Determine the Influencing Cultural Factors on the Strategic Decision-Making Process in the Banking Sector?

2017· article· en· W2588873388 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nizar Raissi, Anas Hakeem

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Strategy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRationalityStructural equation modelingValue (mathematics)BusinessProcess (computing)PsychologyMarketingKnowledge managementSocial psychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article studies the cross-cultural management research on the value and strategies adopted by bank managers while making banking decisions. Although, the study relied on testing causal relationships hypothesised in the research framework of multiple independent and intervening variables. To achieve this, a Structural Equation Modelling technique, was used to analyse the data collected from the survey of 200 respondents from 15 banking institutions. The findings show that the knowledge of bank managers is positively associated with the speed of the SDMP and participation. Likewise, the speed of decision making (SDM) is positively associated with the beliefs, attitudes and values of the top management team. Finally, the laws as a determinant of culture are positively associated to SDM and the degree of rationality.

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)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and StrategySame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207