MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392613045 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27093

If you build it, will they come? Exploring the success factors of knowledge management systems in the Malaysian public sector

2024· article· en· W4392613045 on OpenAlexafffund
Nor’ashikin Ali, Musyazid Md Mustaffa, Gamal Alkawsi, Luiz Fernando Capretz

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKnowledge Management and Sharing
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWestern UniversityTenaga Nasional Berhad
KeywordsPublic sectorKnowledge managementEngineeringEngineering ethicsEngineering managementBusinessPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study investigates the factors that influence the success of knowledge management systems in the public sector. This study integrates the DeLone and McLean Model with critical organizational factors. The model has been tested on the data collected from 158 employees in the public sector in Malaysia, the study found that knowledge content quality has a higher significant impact on the use of knowledge management systems than system quality. Perceived usefulness also has a greater impact than user satisfaction in determining the system's overall success. Among the organizational factors, leadership is the most significant determinant of success. However, the culture of sharing, perceived trust, and incentives do not significantly influence the use of knowledge management systems. The findings suggest that public sector organizations should focus on both system and organizational factors to implement successful knowledge management systems.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.229 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicKnowledge Management and SharingFrench-language works237,207