Linking Supply Chain Disruption Orientation to Supply Chain Resilience and Market Performance with the Stimulus–Organism–Response Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since 2020, supply chain disruptions have emerged as an ever-present challenge. This research provides a glimpse into the organizational structures that develop supply chain resilience and market performance amid continuous supply chain disruptions. Utilizing psychosomatic variables and empirical modeling, a model was constructed through a review of extant literature and tested with PLS-SEM analysis. Uniquely, this research model is framed with the stimulus–organism–response model; thus, placing a firm within the context of a tumultuous environment where stimuli elicit responses from an organization that behaves as an organism. Results demonstrate that organizational culture plays a critical role in developing supply chain resilience amid supply chain dynamism. Market performance was also developed but only through supply chain resilience; supply chain disruption orientation alone did not improve market performance. Mediation effects highlight the importance of supply chain disruption orientation, a strategic orientation that cements an organization’s ability to develop supply chain resilience.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".