MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107390684 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2020.11.033

Factors affecting employees’ motivation

2020· article· en· W3107390684 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBusiness and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPromotion (chess)Data collectionDescriptive statisticsHuman resourcesPsychologyWork (physics)Human resource managementWork motivationMarketingEmployee motivationEmpirical researchBusinessApplied psychologyManagementSociologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceEconomicsStatisticsEngineeringPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study primordially aimed at determining the effects of different factors affecting employee’s motivation at Groz-Beckert Vietnam Co. Ltd. Upon perusal and review of related literature, the researchers found out that there is a dearth of studies that have been conducted relative to this subject appertaining to MNCs in Asian countries. Thus, this paper intends to provide empirical evidences towards the link between and among selected variables being covered in this study. The researchers used the quantitative research analysis method which have surveyed and floated questionnaires to 300 employees from various units, departments, divisions at Groz-Beckert Vietnam Company Ltd and retrieved 265 validated responses. Research result further revealed that, out of the 7 factors: income and benefit, superior, work result, colleague, work condition, training and promotion, work nature positively and significantly impacts the staffs and workers of the said organization. Based on research results and findings, the researchers will provide some viable and palatable recommendations for the human resource development policies and such proposals can enhance employee’s motivation in the said entity. For ease of data collection, convenience sampling was adopted. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 21 that included descriptive and inferential statistics. The outcomes of the study showed that almost all the variables have positive correlation with the workers motivation in performing their jobs at the workplace.

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 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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.172 · 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