he effect of information technology business alignment factors on performance of SMEs
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Strategic IT-business alignment is being expanded by researchers and professionals owing to its beneficial effect on the performance of SMEs. Luftman (2000) [Luftman, J. (2000). Assessing business-IT alignment maturity. Communications of the Association of Information Systems, 4(14), 1–50.] created the Strategic Alignment Model (SAM), which integrates various alignment viewpoints to offer a cohesive perspective on IT-business alignment. While SAM was widely implemented for western IT studies by theoreticians and practitioners, its adoption is not evident in the Middle East with few available studies. The goal of this gap is to examine the effect of small and mediumsized enterprises (SMEs) in Iraq of three alignment styles (communication, governance and competency) listed in SAM. The findings of the current study verified the beneficial effect of all sorts of IT alignment centered on a survey of 228 owners, IT managers, but the latter has also shown a strong positive influence across various types of alignment. Theory and implementation implications are addressed, and more research recommendations are suggested.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it