MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3141218249 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2021.2.014

Moderation effect of client special treatment benefits on the relationship between logistics inte-gration and logistics performance in the logistics services providers’ context

2021· article· en· W3141218249 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Najla Ayesh, Nik Hasnaa Bte Nik Mahmood, Mas Bambang Baroto, Samah M.A. Mubarak

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Teknologi Malaysia
KeywordsModerationBusinessService providerContext (archaeology)Structural equation modelingService (business)Process managementMarketingIndustrial organizationKnowledge managementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the face of global competition and the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, the logistics service providers (LSPs) are facing severe challenges to attain their logistics performance indicators. To continue in such a market place, LSPs need to maintain a dedicated integration relationship with their clients by enhancing client special treatment benefits. The aim of this study is to apply the relational view (RV) theory and the relationship marketing (RM) perspective to examine the moderation effect of special treatment benefits on the link between logistics integration and LSPs’ logistics performance (i.e., cost leadership and customer services innovation). Data was collected from 214 Malaysian LSPs, and analysed using partial least squares-structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). Although the results show that logistics integration has a strong impact on both performances, further analysis shows that a high level of logistics integration has an association with high levels of special treatment benefits (moderating effect), in turn, maintaining performance at a high level. The exploring of the moderation effect of special treatment benefits contributes to the RV theory by incorporating the RM to reflect the moderation effect. Additionally, the study contributes empirically to the field of strategy and RM within the LSPs’ industry. Finally, the findings enable LSPs to better allocate resources to ensure more effective value-based strategies that emphasise on client special treatment benefits to develop financial confidence and maintain long-term dedicated relationships, so as to achieve the target outcomes.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207