MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509995102 · doi:10.1108/01443570210425165

Demand and capacity management decisions in services

2002· article· en· W1509995102 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Operations & Production Management · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapacity managementProfitability indexWork (physics)BusinessDemand managementService (business)MarketingOperations managementComputer scienceEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Service managers are continually challenged with balancing customer demand and service capacity. Recent studies have raised awareness of various demand and capacity management practices available to services, but little numerical work has been done to identify how these decisions work together and how they relate to one another. For instance, reducing prices may attract customers during a slow period, but the extent of impact this should have on cross‐training staff is not clear. A simulation based on theoretical and empirical insights explores the impact of various decisions on profitability and operations. The decisions modelled include the impact of: automation, customer participation, cross training employees, informing customers about the operation, and others. It is shown that demand and capacity decisions do indeed impact on each other – sometimes in ways that are not initially obvious. Results provide useful thought‐starters for service managers striving to improve their operations.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.212 · 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