MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

"Antecedents, Consequences and the Context of EmployeeEngagement in Nonprofit Organizations"

2016· article· en· W2626529185 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntecedent (behavioral psychology)Organizational citizenship behaviorSocial psychologyPsychologyCongruence (geometry)Employee engagementValue (mathematics)Job satisfactionNonprofit organizationPublic relationsContext (archaeology)Organizational commitmentPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article draws on Kahn (1990) and Saks (2006) to examine the extent to which specific nonprofit antecedents impact engagement and how engagement mediates employee and organizational consequences. Our findings suggest that the consequences of job and organization engagement are the behavioural outcomes- job satisfaction, commitment, organization citizenship behaviour- that nonprofits consider as critical to their organization and the employees emphasize. Perhaps the strongest evidence of the impact of engagement is the finding that nonprofit employees are more likely to experience these consequences and less likely to have intention to quit even if antecedents such as job characteristics and value congruence are less likely. Consistent with the literature, we also found that value congruence is a major antecedent in the relationship between nonprofit employees, their jobs and the organization. Our research presents one of the first findings that result from empirically validated measures of engagement in nonprofits.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.270 · 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