MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955285312 · doi:10.5267/j.uscm.2019.5.001

Knowledge sharing and innovative work behavior: The case of Vietnam

2019· article· en· W2955285312 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUncertain Supply Chain Management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocioeconomic Development in MENA
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)BusinessWork behaviorKnowledge managementKnowledge sharingComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Employees' knowledge sharing and innovative work behavior play an important role for the development of Vietnam telecommunication enterprises. Knowledge sharing along with two central processes; namely knowledge donation and collection, fosters employees' innovative work behavior of Vietnam telecommunication enterprises. Based on a sample size survey of 396 Vietnam telecommunication employees and exploration factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM), the study determines factors such as trust, enjoyment in helping others, knowledge self-efficacy, management support, using information and communication technology significantly influence knowledge donation and collection. At the same time, knowledge donation and collection have positive impacts on employees' innovative work behavior of Vietnam telecommunication enterprises. Finally, several suggestions for enhancing employees' knowledge sharing and innovative work behavior of Vietnam telecommunication enterprises managers are given.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.280 · 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