MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970514676 · doi:10.1108/mrr-10-2018-0395

Translating knowledge management into performance

2019· article· en· W2970514676 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Research Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge managementOriginalityMediationOrganizational performanceComputer scienceValue (mathematics)Performance measurementProcess (computing)Performance managementBody of knowledgeOrganizational learningProcess managementBusinessMarketingPsychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper aims to tie together insights from the body of research on knowledge management (KM) and management accounting control systems to propose a conceptual model in which performance measurement systems (PMS) can play a role in translating knowledge resources into enhanced performance. Design/methodology/approach The underlying assumption of the “fit-as-mediation” approach signifies that knowledge features can play a role in the determination of the structure and implementation of particular managerial processes and this, in turn, may support information processing and lead to desirable results within organizations. Findings Synthesizing theory from performance measurement and the knowledge-based view of the firm, the paper’s analysis and discussions elucidate how the implementation of an overarching PMS, i.e. diversity of measurement, could translate the knowledge-related factors, i.e. knowledge resources and knowledge process capabilities, into enhanced performance. In particular, the proposed model shows that a comprehensive PMS plays an intervening role between KM and organizational performance. Research limitations/implications The proposed model may inspire a new research agenda to show how knowledge initiatives are managed and measured in organizations and how they are properly aligned with specific managerial processes to deliver real value. Practical implications Drawing upon the conceptualized associations among KM, PMS and organizational performance, this paper recommends some practical guidelines by highlighting the importance of PMS whereby organizations may reap maximum benefit from their KM initiatives. Originality/value This paper sheds new light on the links between KM and organizational performance, and it appears to be the first study to propose an intervening effect of PMS between KM and organizational 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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.029

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.271 · 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