Fog computing-based logistic supply chain management and organizational agility: The mediating role of user satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although fog computing-based logistic supply chain management (Fog computing-based LSCM) is an emerging technology that proved a high impact on services and products, little research has focused on fog computing-based LSCM. Drawing on the Kano model and organization's theory this paper investigates the effect of fog computing-based LSCM on organizational agility. And the role of user satisfaction as mediator between fog computing-based LSCM and organizational agility. A quantitative approach was used, a questionnaire was designed for data collection, Cronbach's Alpha test was performed on a pilot study to examine the internal consistency of questionnaire items. Fog computing-based LSCM was studied based on Supply chain awareness, Connectivity and Logistics, Integration Process, Seamless Supply Chain, Integration of Processes. Data was collected from a random sample of 550 employees of Al-Hassan industrial city in Jordan. Building on the proposed model, Researchers show that fog computing-based LSCM has a positive impact on organizational agility, fog computing-based LSCM has a positive impact on user satisfaction and finally user satisfaction mediates the relationship between fog computing-based LSCM and organizational agility. Implications for the model are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".