The effects of innovation–cost strategy, knowledge, and action in the supply chain on firm performance
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 Despite the importance of supply chains within today's economy, we know little about how the knowledge of supply chains can contribute to superior performance at the firm level. Building on the resource‐based view, knowledge‐based view and strategic choice theory, we develop hypotheses linking two knowledge‐driven supply chain phenomena (i.e., knowledge development capacity and intellectual capital), innovation–cost strategy, and action to firm‐level performance. Using survey and archival data from 489 firms, we found that performance is influenced by how well knowledge development capacity and intellectual capital efforts complement alternative chain strategies. More specifically, each strategy type requires different constellations of knowledge development capacity and intellectual capital to enhance action and create superior firm performance. These results highlight the importance of supply chain phenomena for firm‐level performance, and more broadly, the value of supply chains as a competitive weapon in contemporary firms.
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 | 0.000 | 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