Hybrid strategic thinking in deregulated retail energy markets
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
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present the results of research undertaken to test the use of traditional strategic approaches in developing competitive advantage through the assessment of the importance to small‐ and medium‐sized firms of cost and services available in a competitive retail market. Design/methodology/approach A survey involving 181 small‐ and medium‐enterprises provided responses to a questionnaire that measured the importance of key success factors to the customer when making a decision regarding their choice of natural gas supplier. Findings The findings suggest that, the use of a low‐cost strategy alone may not be sufficient to create a competitive advantage for suppliers and that a hybrid strategy of cost, service quality, enhanced communication and unbundled services will. Research limitations/implications The sample was limited to natural gas customers in Ontario, Canada at a specific period of time in the deregulation process reducing the ability to generalize results across other regions and other energy types. This limitation is defended by the recognition that the importance of variables measured is consistent between regions and energy types. Practical implications Energy suppliers can create a competitive advantage over their competition if they can differentiate themselves through the application of enhanced service quality and communications. Originality/value Little, if any, empirical research exists that addresses the response of customers to strategic approaches of suppliers in deregulating energy markets.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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