MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136416367 · doi:10.3390/su13063163

Impacts of Employee Empowerment and Organizational Commitment on Workforce Sustainability

2021· article· en· W3136416367 on OpenAlexafffundabout
William C. Murray, Mark Robert Holmes

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWorkforceBusinessHospitality industryOrganizational commitmentEmpowermentTurnoverMarketingEmployee engagementSustainabilityPublic relationsTransformational leadershipManagementEconomicsEconomic growthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building and maintaining a sustainable workforce in the hospitality sector, where demand for talent consistently exceeds supply across the globe, has only been exacerbated by COVID-19. The need to sustain this workforce behooves the industry to unpack core drivers of employee commitment in order to retain top talent. This paper explores how dimensions of employee empowerment increase organizational commitment and, in turn, reduce turnover intention—leading to a more sustained workforce. Drawing on the results of 346 surveys within the Canadian lodging industry, structural equation modeling was undertaken to examine the influence of empowerment on organizational commitment and organizational commitments influence on turnover intention. Findings suggest that the development of meaning through employee empowerment, particularly when the ideals and standards between workers and their organization are aligned, creates a strong emotional commitment which appears to strongly reduce an employee’s intention to leave. Feelings of emotional connection or duty towards an organization show clear positive relationships with reduced intentions to leave. For an industry struggling with higher-than-average turnover intention and labour costs, focusing on creating work with meaning, and instilling a sense of belonging in the workforce will enable organizations to reduce their employee’s turnover intentions.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations128
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207