RFID and buyer‐seller relationships in the retail supply chain
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 aim of this paper is to understand why a collaborative innovation, such as radio‐frequency identification (RFID) technology, engenders seemingly opposite buyer‐seller relationship reactions among members of a supply chain. Design/methodology/approach The researchers carried out a three year exploratory multiple case study using the grounded theory approach through participant‐observation and collaborative action research. The research project culminated in a fully functional RFID proof of concept solution which involved multiple layers of a retail supply chain. The researchers chose the retail industry for the study because it provided the ideal conditions to answer the research question. Findings The results highlight the role of supplier‐buyer relationships as both crucial antecedents that shape RFID infrastructure and the consequence of RFID implementation. Specifically, the impact on and of eight key dimensions was considered, namely communication and information sharing, cooperation, trust, commitment, relationship value, power imbalance and interdependence, adaptation, and conflict. The paper also positions open‐loop RFID projects as supply chain inter‐organizational systems and presents a model to analyze such initiatives. Research limitations/implications The choice of methodology has provided the insight necessary to answer the research question. Other researchers are encouraged to validate these findings through replication with other case studies or through quantitative data to reach analytical and statistical generalizability. The authors also encourage future research on this topic in other industries. Originality/value As more supply chains move forward with collaborative RFID initiatives, it is important that these companies be aware of the strategic role of supplier‐buyer relationships as both crucial antecedents that shape RFID infrastructure and a consequence of RFID implementation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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