MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054816171 · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2010.06.001

Agile manufacturing: Relation to JIT, operational performance and firm performance

2010· article· en· W2054816171 on OpenAlexaff
R. Anthony Inman, R. Samuel Sale, Kenneth W. Green, Dwayne Whitten

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Operations Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPurchasingAgile manufacturingBusinessAgile software developmentProduction (economics)Structural equation modelingMarketingManufacturingIndustrial organizationProcess managementOperations managementComputer scienceEconomicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A structural model incorporating agile manufacturing as the focal construct is theorized and tested. The model includes the primary components of JIT (JIT‐purchasing and JIT‐production) as antecedents and operational performance and firm performance as consequences to agile manufacturing. Using data collected from production and operations managers working for large U.S. manufacturers, the model is assessed following a structural equation modeling methodology. The results indicate that JIT‐purchasing has a direct positive relationship with agile manufacturing while the positive relationship between JIT‐production and agile manufacturing is mediated by JIT‐purchasing. The results also indicate that agile manufacturing has a direct positive relationship with the operational performance of the firm, that the operational performance of the firm has a direct positive relationship with the marketing performance of the firm, and that the positive relationship between the operational performance of the firm and the financial performance of the firm is mediated by the marketing performance of the firm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations460
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Operations ManagementSame topicQuality and Supply ManagementFrench-language works237,207