MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253412384 · doi:10.22146/jh.42851

The Construction of Kekeluargaan as an Indonesia’s Organizational Culture

2019· article· en· W4253412384 on OpenAlexaff
Marko S. Hermawan, Mark Kam Loon Loo

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Humaniora · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEmployee Performance and Management
Canadian institutionsConcordia University of Edmonton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndonesianOrganizational cultureHarmony (color)PropositionIndigenousSociologyNorm (philosophy)SalientKinshipPolitical sciencePublic relationsAnthropologyEpistemologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indonesia has the largest economy in Southeast Asia and the seventh largest GDP in the world, yet little is known about Indonesia’s organizational culture. This paper develops a deep understanding of kekeluargaan (kinship), which derives from an anthropological and sociological epistemologies. The paper explores Javanese culture as the foundation of Indonesia’s business context. A qualitative and indigenous approach was designed to determine if the kekeluargaan norm exists in the Indonesian workplace today. Document analysis and semi-structured interviews were used to collect data. The findings show that the kekeluargaan norm acts as the foundation of Indonesia’s organisational culture; with, hormat (respect) and rukun (harmony). Three proposition are given to consider the importance of understanding kekeluargaan as a salient Indonesian organizational culture. The paper concludes managerial and theoretical implications to Indonesian business context.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal HumanioraSame topicEmployee Performance and ManagementFrench-language works237,207