MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998450319 · doi:10.5430/rwe.v10n4p65

Work Turnover and Its Impact on the Quality of Productivity in the Industrial Sector

2019· article· en· W2998450319 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aisha Abdullah Mahjob Jamal

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in World Economy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityTurnoverIncentiveQuality (philosophy)BusinessWork (physics)Compensation (psychology)Compensation of employeesLabour economicsIndustrial organizationOperations managementEconomicsEconomic growthEngineeringMicroeconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to identify the effect of high turnover on quality of productivity in the industrial sector, and to propose appropriate solutions to reduce the reasons for leaving work. The motivation to carry out this study, the spread of the turnover phenomenon leading to dysfunction is in the interest of the organization, and has a direct impact on the decline in the quality of productivity of the organization, so was applied to the industrial sector to know and measure this impact. The methodology used in this study is the descriptive and analytical approach and the case study methodology.The results of the study show that there is a relationship of statistical significance between the average level of performance of the employee and the level of total productivity in the organization. And that there is a middle relationship between job stability and employee performance level, and that there is a negative relationship between the turnover rate and quality of productivity in the industrial sector. The study recommends that employers try to retain existing workers and provide appropriate incentives for them to reduce the rate of turnover in institutions, because turnover is a cost to institutions that can be eliminated by retaining staff and institutions should improve financial and non-financial compensation in proportion to the circumstances And staff needs to ensure job stability and ensure quality of productivity.

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)0.014
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
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in World EconomySame topicManagement and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207