MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2470745525 · doi:10.1504/ijlsm.2016.077282

Analysing barriers to supplier quality management via interpretive structural modelling: the case of Saudi industry

2016· article· en· W2470745525 on OpenAlexaff
Hassan Mukhtar, Andrea Schiffauerova

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Logistics Systems and Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupply chain managementQuality (philosophy)BusinessSupply chainProcess managementQuality managementSupplier relationship managementComputer scienceKnowledge managementRisk analysis (engineering)Service (business)Marketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A well-organised supply chain network increases the efficiency of the supplier selection and improves quality of service. However, certain barriers to suppliers' quality management prevent companies from achieving these gains. The aim of this study is to identify important barriers that affect suppliers' quality management and to determine the contextual relationships between them using interpretative structural modelling approach. Based on literature review seven important barriers to quality management were identified at the supplier level and a graphical approach was then used to classify these barriers into multiple categories. Experts' opinion from Saudi industry was sought to develop structured self-intersection matrix and reachability matrix, which are used to identify binary relationship among these barriers. The study provides new insights into understanding of the critical factors hindering successful supply chain management.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Logistics Systems and ManagementSame topicQuality and Supply ManagementFrench-language works237,207