MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198589914 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14090415

Contextual Factors and the Diffusion of MAIs in Manufacturing and Non-Manufacturing Sectors in Libya

2021· article· en· W3198589914 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alhadi Boukr, Hassan Yazdifar, Davood Askarany

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmarkingKaizenContingency theoryVariety (cybernetics)Diffusion of innovationsPopularityActivity-based costingKnowledge managementBusinessManufacturing sectorDiffusionManufacturingContingencyInnovation diffusionMarketingOperations managementIndustrial organizationProcess managementLean manufacturingEngineeringPsychologyEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The diffusion of innovation theory has already addressed the major contextual factors hindering or facilitating the diffusion of management accounting innovations (MAIs) in organisations. However, the diffusion of MAIs in less developed countries (such as Libya) is still very low, and the contextual factors addressed by the diffusion of innovation seem to fail to explain the low diffusion. To address this important gap in the literature, this study used contingency theory and investigated the association between a variety of contextual (contingent and institutional) factors and the diffusion of MAIs in Libyan manufacturing and non-manufacturing organisations. Seven MAIs were chosen from the literature perceived to have higher popularity, namely, ABC, ABM, BSC, TC, life-cycle costing, benchmarking, and Kaizen. A questionnaire acted as the data collection instrument. Two hundred and fifty questionnaires were distributed, and one hundred and three useable questionnaires were returned. The results indicate that three factors were significantly associated with facilitating the adoption of MAIs in both sectors. They were using computer systems for MA purposes, top management support, and MA training programmes.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207