MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955590107 · doi:10.5539/mas.v13n7p115

Employee Engagement Level: The Transform from Employee to Partner

2019· article· en· W2955590107 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohannad Abu Daqar, Ahmad K. A. Smoudy

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmployee engagementBusinessDisengagement theoryPrivate sectorEmployee researchEmployee resource groupsMarketingPublic relationsPublic sectorWork (physics)Service (business)Control (management)ManagementEconomicsPolitical scienceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Employee engagement recently has become a hot topic among the consulting firms and in the business press. The purpose of this study was to study and create further understanding of employee’s engagement levels and how to stimulate it to the maximum as long as possible. A survey was completed by 55 employees working in private and governmental organization in Palestine from governmental service, manufacturing, technology, telecommunication, financing and other services like retailer, NGO cultural to generate the output of having a higher employees involvement in the governmental sector rather than the private one due to multiple factors, and having a higher employee engagement in the private sector than the public one due to the more financial and personal recognition they get there. The revealed results stressed that organizations need to recognize employees as assets and customers. Business activities are key parts of the employee lifestyle, so it has a direct impact at his reaction, so if the organization didn’t control these reactions it will be the main drivers for his disengagement. Additionally, the employee engagement level is directly related to the efficiency of work and the overall company performance. The authors recommend adopting employee engagement transforming strategies by the public sector before the private one. Moreover, the study recommends that engagement transforming strategies must be employee-oriented not entity-oriented.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207