MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4328024725 · doi:10.5267/j.uscm.2023.3.008

Factors affecting e-supply chain management systems adoption in Jordan: An empirical study

2023· article· en· W4328024725 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samer Hamadneh

Bibliographic record

VenueUncertain Supply Chain Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOrganizational and Employee Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessSupply chainCompetitive advantageAffect (linguistics)Supply chain managementMarketingEmpirical researchKnowledge managementInformation systemProcess managementComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, there have been a growing number of articles focusing on the benefits of adopting e-SCM systems and the value of such systems in supply chain performance. However, less academic research was devoted to understanding factors affecting the adoption intention of such systems. This study uses the technology, organization, and environment (TOE) framework to examine factors that affect the adoption of e-SCM systems in Jordan, where limited research has been conducted in this country. Through an online survey filled by 251 participants via the LinkedIn website, the study shows that perceived relative advantage, financial resources, employee competency, top management support, competitive pressures, and customer pressure positively impact the adoption intention of e-SCM systems. The findings confirm the association between variables embedded in the TOE framework and the adoption intention of innovative supply chain systems and solutions and support earlier findings. According to the study findings, e-SCM systems providers should focus on the relative advantage these systems offer to increase the likelihood of their adoption.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUncertain Supply Chain ManagementSame topicOrganizational and Employee PerformanceFrench-language works237,207