MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039487011 · doi:10.1108/02635571211264654

Patterns of B2B e‐commerce usage in SMEs

2012· article· en· W2039487011 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

VenueIndustrial Management & Data Systems · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSophisticationBusinessOriginalityMarketingEmpirical researchE-commerceSoftware deploymentValue (mathematics)Knowledge managementIndustrial organizationComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the B2B e‐commerce (B2BEC) usage patterns of North American small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) in their supply chains, the contextual factors that influence usage patterns, and the subsequent effects of these patterns on firm performance. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted an online survey of North American SMEs and obtained 229 responses. They utilized several statistical methods, including cluster analysis and profile analysis, to test five hypotheses. Findings The TOE framework, supplemented with interorganizational factors, provides a valid theoretical guideline to study firms' B2BEC usage patterns. Three distinct types of B2BEC usage patterns – E‐Limiteds, E‐Leaders, and E‐Laggards – emerged. Different sets of contextual factors contribute to the formation of these three patterns of B2BEC adoption. Higher levels of B2BEC usage result in stronger firm performance. Research limitations/implications Future clustering variables could be more specific. The effects of other potential contextual factors should also be explored by future studies. This study can be replicated in other countries to determine whether the findings can be generalized. Practical implications In light of the potential performance improvements that B2BEC adoption offers, managers should assess the risks associated with maintaining their current speed of e‐business deployment versus the risks associated with escalating it. Organizations that have been more reactive should consider how well or ill their sluggish approach prepares them for navigating the inevitability of increasing sophistication in supply chain management. Originality/value Limited empirical research exists on the B2BEC usage patterns of North American SMEs, the contextual factors that motivate them to adopt different B2BEC technologies in their supply chains, and how each of these usage patterns affects their performance. The current study contributes to the literature by shedding light on these issues.

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)0.006
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.417
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.432
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.012 · 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