The role of psychology capital, knowledge sharing and commitment toward managers’ performance in manufacturing company
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
The performance of the manufacturing industry lies in the managers who hold crucial roles. In the revolution industry, data or knowledge holds an important role besides managers’ commitment to work optimally. As intrinsic factors, psychological capital is fundamental for managers’ behavior such as commitment and initiative to share knowledge that simultaneously enables managers’ performance. This research aimed to find the psychology capital’s effect on managers’ performance in manufacturing companies by taking into account sharing knowledge and organization commitment as moderation. Hypothesis testing was done by using data measured with a Likert Scale from 208 managers of a manufacturing company as a representative from each company stationed in the Indonesia Stock Exchange. The results of empirical testing using SEM Lisrel shows that psychological capital affects performance moderated by a variable such as managers’ commitment and knowledge sharing. Based on affected value, the initiative to share knowledge gives greater value to the correlation between psychological capital and managers’ performance in manufacturing companies; compared to commitment. Manufacturing practitioners should be able to facilitate a conducive climate to encourage their managers to share knowledge voluntarily so that the decision-making process and performance are better.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it