Empirical Analysis of Strategic Management in Inter-Governmental Organization
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
In this study, we present a strategic change theoretical model and empirically validate it in the context of inter-governmental organizations. We followed a survey methodology approach and tested our model hypotheses using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Traditional strategic management models were created primarily with the private sector in mind. Therefore, validation of the model constructs for their appropriateness to the present construct is essential, especially that these types of organizations, such as those of the United Nations agencies, face major challenges when it comes to change. We found significant re-groupings of items, leading to the necessity to reformulate the constructs, as the context of our study is significantly different. We found that institutional pressures have a significant influence on strategic change and were mediated by strategic formulation. We also found that strategic pressures did not have any influence on strategic intent. Our research theoretical model and results provide many insights to future research directions and inter-governmental organizational practitioners who are engaged in change management.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 it