The implications of socialization and integration in supply chain management
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
Abstract For many years, firms have been organizing supplier conferences, conducting on‐site visits, and talking about the concept of joint buyer/supplier teams. It is believed that the implementation of these concepts enhances inter‐firm relationships. Furthermore, as firms move towards closer and more integrated supply chains it is argued that socialization is an increasingly important mechanism in facilitating and enhancing the supply integration process. This paper has taken these activities and embedded them in the theory of ‘socialization’ and supply chain integration. The authors propose and test a model on how buyers can use the concepts of supply chain integration and socialization to achieve improved supplier communication and operational performance, and therefore, to improve the buyer's perceived level of the supplier's contractual conformance. The findings reveal that socialization is essential for the development of any significant business relationship and the enhancement of a supply integration strategy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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