The role of artificial intelligence in project management performance: The mediating effects of competence retention and top management support
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on project management performance, with a focus on the mediating roles of top management support and project management competence retention. A cross-sectional research design was employed, and data were collected from 309 employees using a convenience sampling technique. Conducted within the context of Saudi Arabia’s manufacturing sector, the research aligns with the nation’s Vision 2030 goals of economic diversification and technological advancement. Data analysis was performed using structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine the relationships between the constructs. The results reveal that AI has a significant direct impact on both top management support (β = 0.865) and competence retention (β = 0.827), while also indirectly enhancing project performance through these mediating factors (β = 0.666 and β = 0.471, respectively). Additionally, top management support (β = 0.771) and competence retention (β = 0.507) directly influence project performance. The findings highlight the critical role of AI in improving decision-making, resource allocation, and skill retention, ultimately leading to better project outcomes. The findings have significant implications for organizations and policymakers. Practically, organizations in Saudi Arabia’s manufacturing sector can leverage AI to enhance project outcomes by improving decision-making, resource allocation, and skill retention.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it