MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198085074 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2021.7.006

The interaction of social CRM between CRM performance and marketing performance in hotels

2021· article· en· W3198085074 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jassim Ahmad Al-Gasawneh, Khalid Al-Zubi, Nawras M. Nusairat, Abdullah Matar Al-Adamat, Marhana Mohamed Anuar, Ra’d Almestrihi, Bader Ayed Al Qaied

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelationship marketingMarketingBusinessCustomer relationship managementMarketing managementSocial exchange theoryCustomer retentionKnowledge managementComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent times, there has been a significant decline in hotel occupancy rates, and this is primarily due to marketing performance. Hoteliers and the decision-makers are thus seeking new strategies to increase occupancy rates by enhancing marketing performance. The present work examined the relationship between customer relationship management performance and marketing performance by considering the moderating role of social customer relationship management on this relationship. In this work, both the “Resource-Based View Theory” and “Social Exchange Theory” were employed. Data from hotel managers in Jordan were collected, with 139 responses being collected and analyzed altogether. “Smart Partial Least Squares” were used for the analysis process, which showed that customer relationship management performance positively impacted marketing performance, and that Social customer relationship management also had a positive effect on marketing performance. Moreover, the relationship between customer relationship management performance and marketing performance is enhanced through social customer relationship management. These findings can be used by hoteliers to develop effective marketing strategies using new technology and communication tools.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207