MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Supply's Growing Status and Influence: A Sixteen‐Year Perspective

2006· article· en· W2068379228 on OpenAlexaff
P. Fraser Johnson, Michiel R. Leenders, Harold E. Fearon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Supply Chain Management · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOutsourcing and Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessPurchasingOfficerPerspective (graphical)MarketingSupply chainSupply managementPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY The recent completion of a major survey of large North American supply organizations in 2003 permits a longitudinal perspective on supply roles and responsibilities over a 16‐year period. The latest survey complements two earlier studies in 1987 and 1995. All three surveys counted at least 280 responding large North American supply organizations, thereby providing a valuable opportunity to examine trends and changes over time. Major areas of investigation for respondents in both the manufacturing and services sectors include supply organizational structure, supply chain responsibilities, and chief purchasing officer (CPO) reporting line, title and background. This research provides solid evidence that in both manufacturing and services, today's CPOs have greater responsibilities, report higher in the organization and carry more significant titles than their predecessors. The conclusion is that, at least in large North American companies, supply has grown substantially in corporate status and influence since 1987, a particularly welcome discovery.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations43
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Supply Chain ManagementSame topicOutsourcing and Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207