MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327790726 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2022.12.001

The mediating effect of TQM practices on the relationship between strategic planning and productivity

2023· article· en· W4327790726 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tryson Yangailo

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityMediationStrategic planningBusinessTanzaniaSample (material)Total quality managementKnowledge managementOperations managementConfirmatory factor analysisQuality (philosophy)Process managementMarketingComputer scienceEngineeringEconomicsPolitical scienceLean manufacturingEconomic growthSocioeconomicsService (business)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the effect of strategic planning and total quality management practices on organisational productivity. This study employed a quantitative approach using Jamovi software. Sample data were collected from 167 respondents who are in Tanzania Zambia Railway Authority (TAZARA) management using a structured-questionnaire. Model fit and construct validity were checked using confirmatory factor analysis and correlation matrix while mediation analysis was carried out using GLM procedure. The results of study present that strategic planning has a significant effect on productivity. The results also indicate that customer focus and important innovation foster organizational productivity and partially mediate the relationship between strategic planning and productivity. The study also shows that education and training has no significant effect on productivity and does not mediate strategic planning and productivity association.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicQuality and Supply ManagementFrench-language works237,207