MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210909633 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v11n1p100

Perceived Challenges of Implementing An Integrated Talent Management Strategy at A Tertiary Institution in South Africa

2021· article· en· W3210909633 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Owen Zivanai Mukwawaya, Cecile Gerwel Proches, Paul Green

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicHuman Resource and Talent Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutionHigher educationSustainabilityPublic relationsTalent managementSample (material)Inclusion (mineral)BusinessMedical educationMarketingPolitical scienceSociologyMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to investigate and delineate the perceived challenges of implementing an integrated talent management strategy at a South African tertiary institution. The study was conducted at a relatively new university that opened its doors on the 1st of January 2015. Since the inception of the university under study, the institution has grown considerably but without proper policies and strategies in place to ensure its competitiveness and sustainability within the current Higher Education and Training sector in the country. A qualitative research methodology in the form of semi-structured interviews conducted with a convenience sample of 10 participants was employed to execute the study. The sample was drawn from the population of directors and official representatives of administrative, academic and support staff. The inclusion of these participants was premised on the idea that by virtue of their job description, they would be most exposed to talent management issues. Results of the study indicate that the major challenges experienced in implementing an integrated talent management strategy at the university include lack of management commitment and budget, as well as unionism and resistance to change amongst staff. As such, the primary recommendations of this study are for demonstrated commitment by university management towards accessing adequate finances to facilitate the implementation of a sound talent management strategy that will assist in promoting both the quality and longevity of the tertiary education institution in question.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicHuman Resource and Talent ManagementFrench-language works237,207