MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095674236 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2020.9.045

Competency improvement of cooperative managers to improve members' welfare by implementing business strategies

2020· article· en· W3095674236 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Agus Haryono, Mudjiarto Mudjiarto, Nanik Wahyunib, Boge Triatmanto

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCooperative Studies and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCHIST-ERAAgencia Nacional de Investigación e Innovación
KeywordsWelfareCompetence (human resources)BusinessMarketingManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to analyze the improvement of the welfare of cooperative members in a sustainable manner, which is influenced by the development of business strategies and the competence of members. The research was conducted at women's cooperatives in East Java Province, Indonesia. The research design uses a quantitative approach. Respondents in this study are members of active women's cooperatives who have their own businesses from cooperative capital. The questionnaire was distributed by directly meeting respondents or via email among 185 respondents who were members of active cooperatives. SEM analysis was used to determine the effect of competency variables on improving member welfare mediated by business strategies. The results of this study indicate that the welfare of cooperative members was largely determined by the competence of cooperative member business actors, but this welfare improvement will be more effective if business actors understand and implement business strategies even though on a small scale.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicCooperative Studies and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207