Digital talent and job satisfaction in the administrative staff of a public university with WarpPLS 8.0
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Job satisfaction and digital talent are topics of growing interest in the context of digital transformation. Digitalization is changing the way organizations operate and how employees perceive their work. The state and its administrative staff is no exception, as these capabilities are essential to perform operational tasks that underpin the public institution's documentary processes. This study investigates the influence of digital talent (independent variable) on job satisfaction (dependent variable), employing structural equation modeling (SEM) using WarpPLS software. Digital Talent is broken down into three sub-variables: Digital Competencies of Employees (DCE), Capacity for Digital Innovation and Creativity (CIDC) and Adaptability and Continuous Learning (ACL), while Job Satisfaction is measured through two sub-variables: Work Environment (WE) and Professional Development Opportunities (PDO). The analyses revealed that Capacity for Innovation and Digital Creativity (CIDC) has a significant impact on Work Environment, with a path coefficient (β) of 0.13 (p = 0.01). Similarly, adaptability and continuous learning (ACL) positively influence the work environment, with a path coefficient (β) of 0.10 (p = 0.04). In addition, a strong relationship was found between professional development opportunities (PDO) and work environment, with a path coefficient (β) of 0.68 (p < 0.001). For the relationship between digital competencies (DCE) and career development opportunities, the path coefficient was 0.10 (p = 0.04). Digital talent is a key predictor of job satisfaction in administrative staff. The results suggest that investing in the development of digital capabilities, especially innovation and creativity, as well as adaptability, is essential to improve the work environment and career development opportunities.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".