Employee Compensation, Training and Financial Performance during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is multi-faceted: first, to analyze the impact of employee compensation and training on firms’ financial performance and the moderating effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the relationship between employee compensation and financial performance, as well as the relationship between training and financial performance; and second, to analyze the decision-making process pertaining to these two aspects of human resources both prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study utilizes a sample of 103 Belgian pharmaceutical firms whose financial statements were published in the Bureau Van Djik database between 2012 and 2021. The estimation approach employed was panel data analysis, and the Generalized Method of Moments was used to evaluate the robustness of the system. Whether or not a crisis exists greatly alters the parameters that influence a pharmaceutical company’s business performance. Specifically, the results reveal that the COVID-19 pandemic had a substantial and negative impact on financial performance. Human resource factors, which include employee compensation and training, more accurately explain the company’s performance. The key contribution of such an approach is to illustrate that human resource-related factors have an impact on performance indicators during various types of crises, thereby assisting HR managers in making the best decision during times of crisis. It provides basic guidelines for policymakers to adhere to in order to have a better knowledge of how human capital characteristics might be utilized to improve the performance of their businesses during times of crisis. In addition, this research demonstrates that the firm’s unique characteristics may affect the success of Belgian businesses.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".