Leadership Group Preference and Its Effect on Staff Performance in Niger Delta University, Wilberforce Island, Bayelsa State
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined leadership group preference and organizational staff performance in Niger Delta University. The study was anchored on the Mcgregor theory X and Y. The cross-sectional survey design was employed and questionnaire was used as the instrument to collect primary data along secondary data. Multi-stage sampling technique was adopted for the study. The data were analyzed with descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentages, mean and standard deviation) and inferential statistics such as Simple Linear Regression and Binary Logistic Regression at P-0.05 level of significance. The study established that leadership group preference exerts 70.5% influence on organizational staff performance among non-academic staffs in Niger Delta University. Socio-demographic variables except faculty influenced leadership group preference. The study also discovered that respondents were dissatisfied with their work performance. The study concluded that leadership group preference to a large extent influenced organizational staff performance. The study recommended that practical efforts must be devised by management of Niger Delta University to discourage leadership group preference, promotion in workplace should be determined by merit not be sheer preference among others.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".