MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2743170277 · doi:10.1504/ijlic.2018.088345

Intellectual capital and organisational performance in Malaysian knowledge-intensive SMEs

2017· article· en· W2743170277 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Khalique, Nick Bontis, Jamal Abdul Nassir Shaari, Mohd Rafi Yaacob, Rohana Ngah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural capitalIntellectual capitalCronbach's alphaBusinessScope (computer science)Structural equation modelingConfirmatory factor analysisRelational capitalEconomic capitalSample (material)Human capitalCapital (architecture)Reliability (semiconductor)Knowledge managementIndividual capitalMarketingEconomicsComputer scienceFinanceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was designed to test and validate the integrated intellectual capital model by examining the relationship between intellectual capital and organisational performance of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) operating in the electrical and electronics manufacturing sectors in Malaysia. Data was collected through a validated survey instrument administered on a sample of 237 respondents from targeted SMEs. Cronbach's alpha and confirmatory factor analysis were used to examine the reliability and validity of the research instrument. Structural equation modelling was used to test the proposed research hypotheses. The results demonstrate that human capital, customer capital, structural capital, social capital, technological capital and spiritual capital are crucial components of intellectual capital and all link to organisational performance. Although there are limitations to measuring intellectual capital quantitatively, this study provides further insight into the relationship between intellectual capital and organisational performance within a developing nation. The limitations of the study include a limited scope of generalisability.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 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

Citations132
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Learning and Intellectual CapitalSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207