The Impact of Erp Application on Employees' Performance and Working Process Agility in Higher Education Sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research studies the influence of ERP application systems (ERP) on the performance of administrative staff and the development of professional abilities. We note that more research in this area looked at the effects of ERP systems on the relationship between the different interests and administrative functions and they didnâÂÂt study the performance and efficiency of the employee during doing work. From this perspective, it was essential that we hire a cross-sectional field study, analysis and exploratory case study of the administrative staff of Umm Al Qura University. Thus, the aim of the study as well as to highlight the distinctive features of the institution in light of systems integration and application of information and functional role (ERP) in improving employee performance. The target population for this study was higher education sector employees of Saudi Arabia among which 100 employees were taken for data collection through questionnaire. The results showed that there is a positive and significant relationship between decision support system (DSS), management of change and development (MCD), operations reengineering, and quality (ORQ) and employeesâ performance defined by project team competence and organization (PTCO).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".