MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366983432 · doi:10.1007/s10660-023-09698-1

Mobile application e-grocery retail adoption challenges and coping strategies: a South African small and medium enterprises’ perspective

2023· article· en· W4366983432 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Commerce Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Retail Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessMarketingGrocery shoppingSmall and medium-sized enterprisesContext (archaeology)Emerging markets

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper explores how small and medium-sized e-grocery mobile application retailers evolving within the geographical context of South Africa and operating in the urban, township, and rural areas respond to theoretically and emerging field-based e-business and e-grocery adoption challenges, respectively. The study used semi-structured qualitative interviews to explore the coping strategies of e-grocery mobile application retailers to mitigate technological, organizational, and environmental (TOE) adoption challenges. The significance of small grocery adoption strategies related to context informs e-grocery adoption from the evidence generated in other small e-grocers and for the superior grade of TOE (or theoretical) knowledge sought from the inevitable evolving mobile application and digital grocery markets. The findings reveal that specialist skills and unified team production are crucial conduits for lowering the TOE barriers to e-business and e-grocery adoption. They also reveal the interconnected resource orchestration, shared value, and social inclusion strategies used to mitigate various e-business and e-grocery challenges.

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.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.248 · 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