MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895707362 · doi:10.5430/mos.v5n3p29

Work Motivation in Temporary Organizations: Establishing Theoretical Corpus

2018· article· en· W2895707362 on OpenAlexaff
Ravikiran Dwivedula, Christophe Bredillet, Ralf Müller

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement and Organizational Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModerationEvent (particle physics)Perspective (graphical)Work (physics)Knowledge managementJob characteristic theoryActor–network theoryJob designComputer sciencePsychologyEpistemologySocial psychologyJob performanceSociologyJob satisfactionArtificial intelligenceSocial scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to organize this literature, which will facilitate a systematic investigation of work motivation in temporary organizations. First, we highlight the limitations of current theoretical lenses of work motivation specific to temporary organizations. Second, we synthesize three major theories- Event-Systems (E-S) theory, Socio-Technical Systems (STS) Perspective/Job Design, and Actor-Network Theory (ANT) to establish the theoretical corpus for our proposed model of work motivation. Our model conceptualizes project work characteristics as an ‘Event’ capable of producing an ‘event outcome’ which is work motivation. This is explained using E-S and STS/ Job Design theories. Propositions are introduced. The moderation effect is explained using ANT. Third, we present the academic contribution of our proposed model.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0050.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement and Organizational StudiesSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207