MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026456402 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2020.5.002

A study on relationship between human resources and strategic performance: The mediating role of productivity

2020· article· en· W3026456402 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hosam Shrouf, Shaker Al-Qudah, Khaldoon Al Khawaldeh, Abdallah Mishael Obeidat, Abas Al Rawashdeh

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOrganizational and Employee Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityBusinessKnowledge managementHuman resourcesProcess managementIndustrial organizationComputer scienceOperations managementMarketingManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of the study is to investigate the mediating role of the productivity of the banks sector in Jordan based on the relationship between human resources and strategic performance from the point of view of the senior management managers and functional unit managers (human resources, marketing, finance and accounting). Human resources were measured through human resource activities. The population of the current study represented all the commercial banks in Jordan, the total number of which is 26. A survey questionnaire is prepared based on the published literature, and the data are collected from 371 respondents from the targeted banks. The necessary tests to ensure reliability and validity are performed using SPSS. The results indicate that human resources positively affected strategic performance and productivity. The findings also revealed that productivity positively mediated the relationship between human resources and the commercial banks' strategic 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.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations44
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicOrganizational and Employee PerformanceFrench-language works237,207