Leadership development program: a survey on perceived program success, employment satisfaction, and intent to stay
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research project focused on the measurement of the effect of an organization's leadership development program relating to employees' perceived improvement in job satisfaction and intent to stay. There are three core elements of the leadership development program: teamwork, commitment to the team and leadership. The literature review focused on research of the three core elements and why they are important in creating leaders and leadership within an organization. The focus of the study was only in the Canadian Operations of the organization. The survey was designed to measure the relationship between the program's core elements and employees' job satisfaction and intent to stay. The majority of the results poorly supported the hypotheses due to the very small survey population. There were some promising results with positive correlations between intent to stay for ethical considerations of the program and a company that offers such training. There are opportunities for the organization to use these results and develop a continual improvement process for the program to focus on, developing the connections between the core elements and how the program is initiated within the organization. There were several limitations such as small population size, the research questions themselves and focus on just the Canadian Operations. --Leaf ii.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 it