MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386741325 · doi:10.3390/jrfm16090409

The Effect of Employee Involvement in Strategic Change on the Performance of Insurance Companies in Zimbabwe

2023· article· en· W4386741325 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bibi Zaheenah Chummun, Lizanani Nleya

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Analysis and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLikert scaleBusinessCompetition (biology)IBMMarketingTeamworkScale (ratio)Competitive advantageTest (biology)ManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to rapid technological advancements and intense competition, organizations must find new ways to do business. As a result, changes in an organization’s structures, systems, and strategies are now a pre-requisite to survive the competition. Involving employees in strategic change programmes will harness ideas that enhance competitive advantage and organizational performance. The purpose of this study is to inform industry executives, especially in insurance companies, that employees are crucial resources that must be valued for their contribution to the survival of the organization. A total of 115 respondents were surveyed using a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire in a quantitative research approach. This study employed the multiple regression method to test the effect of five employee involvement constructs on organizational performance using IBM SPSS V28 software. All five constructs, that is, participation in decision-making, teamwork, communication, creativity, and innovation, significantly affected the performance of insurance companies in Zimbabwe. This study’s findings will convince top managerial leaders of the insurance industry to acknowledge and appreciate the importance of involving employees in strategic change programmes. Furthermore, industry regulatory authorities can promote policies and practices that involve employees in decision-making.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicEconomic Analysis and PolicyFrench-language works237,207