Investment in intellectual capital and achievement of the competitive advantage in hotel sector
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary objective of the research paper is to provide some insights on the concepts of intellectual capital and its important dimensions alongside to investigate the possible association between intellectual capital and attainment of competitive advantage. This study focuses on Iraqi hotel industry which is an under-research area in the context of intellectual capital and its relationship with competitive advantage. An adapted questionnaire was utilized to collect the responses from top and middle level managers of four and five-star hotels in Iraq. The reliability and validity of data collection instrument were measured through Cronbach's alpha, Composite Reliability and Average Variance Extracted respectively. The competitive advantage was then regressed against Human, Relational and Structural capital by application of Partial Least Square methodology. Results of the study showed a positive and strong connotation among intellectual capital and attainment of competitive advantage. The human capital had the highest contribution for competitive advantage in hotel sector of Iraq. The top management of hotels should take interest to develop, maintain and retain human capital to attain competitive advantage over competitors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it