Relación entre el estilo de liderazgo y el desempeño laboral de los colaboradores de CINEPLANET - centro trujillo - 1 trimestre 2017
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present research aims to establish the relationship between the Leadership Style and the \nWork Performance of the collaborators of the company Cineplanet Centro Trujillo of the \ndistrict of Trujillo during the first quarter of 2017. \nThe statement of the problem was: What is the relationship between the Leadership Style \nand the Work Performance of the collaborators of the company "Cineplanet Centro" of the \ndistrict of Trujillo in the first quarter of 2017; And the hypothesis: The relationship between \nthe style of leadership and the work performance of employees in the company Cineplanet \nCenter Trujillo of the district of Trujillo in the first quarter of 2017 is direct. \nThe study population consisted of 21 employees from the area of Piso; Taking all employees \nas a sample because it is a small population. \nThe applied research design was descriptive correlational. For data collection, the survey \nwas applied as a technique, using the questionnaire as an instrument. \nThe most relevant results were: The collaborators consider that the style of transactional \nleadership is predominant, while the work performance of the collaborators is regular, results \nthat are corroborated with the statistical test Chi Cuadrado, whose value of coefficient of \npositive relation is 16 % Indicating that there is a direct relationship.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".