The Influence of Global Cooperative Principles on Leadership Effectiveness in SACCOS in Kampala City, Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between global cooperative principles and leadership effectiveness of Savings and Credit Cooperative Societies (SACCOS) in Kampala City. Design/Methodology/Approach:The study uses a positivist design through a quantitative approach where hypotheses are tested using linear regression analysis based on survey data (n = 161) from members of Savings and Credit Cooperative Societies in Uganda.Findings: The findings reveal very weak correlations and non-significant relationships between all the global cooperative principles and leadership effectiveness in SACCOS in Kampala City. Originality/Value:This study provides empirical evidence on the relationship between global cooperative principles of voluntary and open membership, democratic member control, economic member participation, autonomy and independence, education, training and information, cooperation among cooperatives and, concern for community in SACCOS in Kampala City.Within available literature and, to the best of the authors' knowledge there is no research that has been conducted along the concepts of global principles of cooperatives and leadership effectiveness within the confines of Kampala City.Thus, the findings from this study are critical in bridging the current research gap.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".