MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405119311 · doi:10.21275/mr211214024240

Development of Motivational Strategies to Enhance Productivity in Small and Medium Scale Construction Firms in Ghana

2021· article· en· W4405119311 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Mensah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsThinkpath Engineering Services (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityScale (ratio)Industrial organizationBusinessNatural resource economicsEconomicsEconomic growthGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study sought to recommends and quantifies the effect of the effective motivational strategies on the productivity of small and medium scale construction firms in Ghana. Also to develop a framework for motivating employee of small and medium construction firms. Data collection was through well structured questionnaire administered to 164 respondents selected through simple random and systematic sampling techniques. The methods of analysis used were descriptive statistics and production function analysis using the Ordinary Least Square (OLS) criterion to estimate the parameters of the production function. The result showed that, majority of the respondents, 21% said job security was the most important driving force in their life so long as job is concern. Besides, it was realised that, an increase in the level of some motivational strategies: Job security, Opportunity for further studies, Employers? good relationship with employees, Involving employees in decision making and Employers? recognition of employees will improve productivity by 0.0255, 0.0342, 0.073, 0.067 and 0.036 respectively. A model for motivating employees was also developed base on the results. Workers of all organisations need to be motivated to facilitate their input towards the attainment of organisational goals. Construction workers like all other worker groups need this sort of motivation to enable them give off their best. It?s incumbent upon management to be able to identify superior performances and reward them accordingly. This would lead to greater effort towards goal attainment.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)Same topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207