MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385777167 · doi:10.5267/j.jpm.2023.6.001

An analysis of sustainable change management for quality 4.0: Evidence from hybrid project management adoption in the Malaysian FinTech context

2023· article· en· W4385777167 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tan Chi Xiang, Zunirah Mohd Talib, Md Gapar Md Johar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Project Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheory of planned behaviorStructural equation modelingContext (archaeology)Knowledge managementSustainabilityQuality (philosophy)Control (management)BusinessMarketingAffect (linguistics)Process managementComputer sciencePsychologyManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the authors aim to analyse organisational intention and focus on hybrid project management (HPM) methodology adoption in FinTech system software development. It is important to ascertain the internal and external factors that affect organisational decision-makers’ intentions towards HPM adoption. This study aims to apply a theoretical approach integrating Technology-Organisation-Environment (TOE), which examines the factors that impact FinTech organisations’ decisions to adopt HPM into their software development projects, together with the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) which examines the behavioural intention. It addresses those factors that form organisational decision-makers’ readiness for HPM implementation and enable their intention to use it. When combining the independent, dependent, and moderating variables, the results show that the effect of relative advantage, top management support, and industry pressure have a positive influence on individual’s attitude towards HPM adoption in FinTech Malaysia and sustainability in Quality 4.0. The authors also considered the influence of attitudes and perceived behavioural control variables having a positive influence on sustainable intention of HPM adoption in the FinTech industry. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) was used to verify the proposed hypotheses, with the exception of the direct influence of top management support or attitude on intention to adopt.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.283
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Project ManagementSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207