Kajian Penerapan Manajemen Talenta dalam Rangka Mengoptimalkan Kinerja Sumber Daya Manusia pada Bank Bri Kantor Cabang Sukabumi Kantor Wilayah Bandung
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi dan mengetahui faktor – faktor penghambat program manajemen talenta yang dijalankan di Bank BRI Kantor Cabang Sukabumi Kantor Wilayah Bandung sebagai bagian dari aktivitas sumber daya manusia. Subjek dalam penelitian ini adalah Supervisor Operasional sebagai Kepala SDM dan Asisten Manajer Bisnis Mikro yang membina pegawai di BRI Unit (segmentasi mikro). Teknik pengumpulan data yang digunakan adalah dengan metode wawancara, studi dokumentasi dan observasi. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa kinerja sumber daya manusia di perusahaan sudah cukup baik namun belum dijalankan dengan optimal, baik pekerja maupun manajemen belum memahami secara mendalam mengenai definisi manajemen talenta di perusahaan. Selain itu perusahaan juga belum memiliki roadmap yang jelas mengenai penerapan manajemen talenta. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, maka peneliti membuat sebuah roadmap penerapan manajemen talenta yang diharapkan mampu memecahkan permasalahan yang selama ini terjadi sehingga penerapan manajemen talenta dapat berjalan dengan optimal.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.007 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".