MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047462078 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2020.7.018

Intrapreneurial behaviors and innovative performance: The moderating role of employees’ characteristics in commercial banks

2020· article· en· W3047462078 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Omar Radwan ALmasri, Alaeddin Mohammed Khalaf Ahmad

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessProductivityCommercial bankMarketingSustainabilityPopulationBusiness administrationFinanceEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aimed to investigate the impact of the intrapreneurial behaviors of bank employees on the innovative performance of commercial banks in Jordan and the moderating role of employees' characteristics. The research population comprised of approximately 676 branches of commercial banks, with approximately 18,858 banking employees from different cities in Jordan. A convenience sampling technique was used to choose the participants in this research. A total of 372 questionnaires were distributed, and 250 were returned. The number of valid questionnaires was 242, which was a response rate of 65%. The results confirmed a significant and positive effect of intrapreneurial behaviors on the innovative performance of banks. This research provides useful guidelines for further and future research possibilities, such as exploring why one bank's performance or competitiveness is stronger than another bank, where extracting entrepreneurial performance from the employees and supporting it represents the difference between banks. Banks that engage in better entrepreneurial performance will perform better, resulting in better productivity and business sustainability. The outcome of this study provides essential suggestions for banks for enhancing and support innovative performance in Jordan.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccountingSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207