Interactions between Dispatchers and Truck Drivers in a High Turnover Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The North American trucking industry has been facing chronic issues related to the retention of a skilled workforce since the end of the 1980s. These issues have both direct economic and social impact; for example, high driver turnover has been linked to higher accident rates. Research has revealed a clear link between the dispatcher’s role and driver turnover, yet little is known about the interactions of this relationship in day-to-day work experience. The aim of the present article, therefore, is to document the dynamic environment shaping interactions between dispatchers and truck drivers in addressing issues related to high turnover. In order to capture the daily interactions of these players, a qualitative approach was used, based on 17 individual interviews and three group discussions with dispatchers, truck drivers and labour and management representatives from 11 different Quebec-based organizations. The results reveal four key characteristics influencing the day-to-day dynamics of trucking operations: 1) the importance of dispatcher-driver interaction in efficient and quality work operations; 2) the precedence of customer satisfaction in these interactions; 3) the interdependent nature of the dispatcher-driver relationship; and lastly, 4) the role of listening and mutual respect. More specifically, the results suggest that dispatcher-driver interactions tend to occur in a high-pressure environment where work demands often necessitate prioritizing operational concerns over interpersonal ones. They also demonstrate that a bi-directional, “win-win” relationship based on constructive interactions, listening and mutual respect are essential conditions in achieving both work efficiency and job satisfaction. These results appear to confirm the findings of several previous studies and shed new light on understanding the relationship between these players.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".