Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the barriers and opportunities faced by women in supply chain leadership, a field traditionally dominated by men. Through in-depth interviews and thematic analysis, it uncovers the pervasive cultural and societal biases that undermine women's perceived competence and suitability for leadership roles. These biases, often rooted in deep-seated stereotypes, influence hiring and promotion decisions, creating significant obstacles for women. Structural and organizational barriers, such as the lack of formal diversity policies, flexible working arrangements, and adequate mentorship, further hinder women's career progression. The dual burden of professional and domestic responsibilities also disproportionately affects women, limiting their availability for work-related travel and extended hours, which are often required in supply chain roles. Despite these challenges, the study identifies several pathways to promote gender diversity in supply chain leadership. Organizational commitment to diversity and inclusion, flexible working policies, and comprehensive mentorship programs are crucial in supporting women's advancement. Education and professional development opportunities are essential in equipping women with the necessary skills for leadership roles. Additionally, fostering an inclusive corporate culture that values diverse perspectives and addresses discrimination is vital for creating a supportive environment. Broader societal and policy-level changes, such as government and industry initiatives promoting gender diversity, are also necessary. The integration of emerging areas like sustainability, entrepreneurship, emotional intelligence, marketing, and supplier relationship management offers new opportunities for women to contribute to the industry's evolution. By addressing these barriers and leveraging the identified opportunities, it is possible to create a more inclusive and equitable supply chain industry, benefiting both the industry and society.
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 | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".