MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612914928

A Study to Find out the Influencing Factors for Non-Usage of Management Information System in Selected Small Scale Industries

2013· article· en· W2612914928 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
C. G. Ramachandra, T.R. Srinivas

Bibliographic record

VenueMechanical Engineering Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)Sample (material)Value (mathematics)BusinessMarketingData collectionKnowledge managementOperations managementComputer scienceEngineeringStatisticsMathematicsGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this information age, data has become one of the most important resources to organizations. The effective and efficient management of large quantities of data is a common problem found in many industries. In this study, initially it was decided to carry out a survey to verify the implementation, usage and acceptance of MIS in 200 small scale industries in and around Karnataka state. The study is exclusively based on the primary data collected through a sample survey is conducted on the respondents such as Chief Executives, line supervisors, Engineers, Managers and Supervisors of the respective organizations by supplying questionnaires prepared on the basis of review of literature and many discussions with experienced academicians, consultants and professionals. The study reveals that only 96 (46%) out of 200 small scale industries were making use of MIS in their organization. The study is extended to find out the possible reasons for non usage of MIS in the remaining104 small scale, so the respondents were requested to provide a feedback on various factors which could be possible reason for non-use of MIS in their respective units. These respondents were supplied with the questionnaires and interviewed for cross verification. After collecting the feedback, the average and standard deviation is calculated for each reason for non-use of MIS. It is noticed that the calculated value of standard deviation for each responses is not much, i.e. less than one. So the collected feedback from the respondents for possible reason for non-usage of MIS is appropriate. The study also found out the most influencing factors i.e. possible reasons for non-usage of MIS in selected small scale To validate these results different analysis such as Normality test and Onesample t-Tests were carried out with the help of Minitab statistical software.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMechanical Engineering ResearchSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207