MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077193893 · doi:10.1016/s0272-6963(00)00051-6

The production performance benefits from JIT implementation

2000· article· en· W2077193893 on OpenAlexaff
Rosemary Fullerton, Cheryl S. McWatters

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Operations Management · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetitor analysisBusinessCompetition (biology)Production (economics)Quality (philosophy)Industrial organizationQuality managementMarketingCompetitive advantageKaizenOperations managementEconomicsLean manufacturingMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The intense competition in the current marketplace has forced firms to reexamine their methods of doing business. The US manufacturers have struggled with growing trade deficits and outsourced operations, while strong market competitors have emerged, using superior manufacturing practices in the form of just‐in‐time (JIT) and continuous process improvement. Although proponents cite the many benefits of JIT adoption, its implementation rate in the US has been relatively conservative. This study uses survey responses from executives at 95 JIT‐practicing firms to better understand the benefits that firms have experienced through JIT adoption, and whether a more comprehensive implementation is worthwhile. The research results demonstrate that implementing the quality, continuous improvement, and waste reduction practices embodied in the JIT philosophy can enhance firm competitiveness. JIT implementation improves performance through lower inventory levels, reduced quality costs, and greater customer responsiveness. This study indicates that JIT is a vital manufacturing strategy to build and sustain competitive advantage.

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)0.019
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
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations407
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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