MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010211049 · doi:10.1108/bpmj-06-2018-0150

Taxonomy of business value underlying motivations for e-HRM adoption

2020· article· en· W3010211049 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

VenueBusiness Process Management Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEmployer Branding and e-HRM
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaxonomy (biology)Knowledge managementHuman resource managementNormativeOriginalityValue (mathematics)BusinessComputer scienceManagement scienceQualitative researchSociologyPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper was to develop a taxonomy of organizations based on business value (BV) underlying electronic human resource management (e-HRM) adoption motivations. Design/methodology/approach A taxonomy was developed using cluster analysis of the online case stories of 146 firms. Results were validated using discriminant analysis. Differences in organization and environmental characteristics across clusters were examined. Findings Seven meaningful and distinct clusters were uncovered showing asymmetry in the consideration of strategic BV underlying the motivations of e-HRM adoption. Statistical tests revealed that the seven clusters have high internal validity. Statistically significant differences in organizational conditions were found among clusters. Research limitations/implications This research offers an empirically and conceptually grounded taxonomy of organizations that reveals strategic and nonstrategic BV that organizations actually put forward and the way they combine together to form different profiles. This research is based on secondary data, that is, data initially gathered for a distinct goal different from this research. Practical implications The developed taxonomy provides human resource (HR) managers, executives, researchers and consultants a useful way to describe and understand motivations underlying e-HRM adoption. The taxonomy may also facilitate valid and systematic assessment of e-HRM effectiveness. Originality/value This research moves the debate beyond normative arguments to a more analytic assessment of the actual practice of organizations regarding e-HRM adoption and expected BV.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.176 · 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