Exploring the relationships of the culture of competitiveness and knowledge development to sustainable supply chain management and organizational performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to draw upon the resource-based view of the firm to explore how a firm’s resources (assets and capabilities) such as culture of competitiveness (CC) and knowledge development (KD) relate to sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) and organizational performance (OP). Design/methodology/approach Data were collected from 242 supply chain and logistics managers in Pakistan and a structured equation modeling approach was used. Findings The results of the study provide support for the proposed hypotheses and indicate that CC and KD are positively related to SSCM and OP. This points out that the organizations in Pakistan are likely to emphasize CC and KD to achieve OP. However, the positive but weak association of CC and KD with SSCM highlights that the organizations in Pakistan show less concern for SSCM. Originality/value The literature did not reveal any study which examined the relationships of the CC and KD to SSCM and OP in developing countries. The present study aims to address this gap in the literature.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".