MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946431716 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2019.5.011

The influence of total quality management toward organization performance

2019· article· en· W2946431716 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yuni Pambreni, Ali Khatibi, S. M. Ferdous Azam, Jacquline Tham

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTotal quality managementBusinessProcess managementTertiary sector of the economyService (business)MarketingQuality (philosophy)Service qualityOperations managementConceptual modelKnowledge managementBusiness administrationComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is primarily focused on the effect of total quality management (TQM) on organization performance of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) service sector in Selangor, Malaysia. The four critical elements of TQM; namely customer focus (X1), continuous improvement (X2), strategically based (X3), and total employee involvement (X4) are used as an important factors influencing on organization performance (Y). The necessary data are collected from 350 managers/owners of service sector SMEs in Selangor, Malaysia using some questionnaire. Multiple linear regression analysis is performed in this study by using SPSS 23. All hypotheses are positively fit with the conceptual model and show a positive impact of TQM on organization performance. The research finding indicate that TQM elements; namely customer focus, continuous improvement, strategically based, and total employee involvement have a positive and significant effects on organization performance.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations168
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicQuality and Supply ManagementFrench-language works237,207