Harnessing Business Anthropology In Human Resource Management: Developing An Effective Organisational Culture For Organisational Development With Reference To Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines how cultural influences, Business Anthropology, and corporate culture affect Bangladeshi HRM practices and employee performance. To accomplish its goals, the study used a mixed-methods design including quantitative and qualitative methods. The garment sector was the focus of 150 purposive sampled HR Managers, HR Professionals, and workers from different Bangladeshi enterprises. The study confirms that cultural influences strongly affect HRM practices in Bangladeshi organizations. Religion, language, social hierarchy, conventions, and traditions influence HRM strategies and policies. Business Anthropology improves HRM processes significantly. Anthropological ideas and methods may help firms understand employee behaviors and preferences, improving HRM interventions and employee happiness. Additionally, company culture improves employee performance, according to the research. A strong, positive business culture with common values and practices boosts employee enthusiasm and productivity. Cultural understanding and Business Anthropology may promote a more inclusive workplace, boosting employee engagement and company growth. In conclusion, cultural aspects, Business Anthropology, and organizational culture are crucial to building an effective HRM framework for organizational growth in Bangladeshi enterprises. These elements help organizations unleash their employees' full potential, ensuring long-term success in a changing corporate environment
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 | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".