Exploring the Impact of Collaborative Practices on Supply Chain Resilience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dynamic and unpredictable nature of modern supply chains necessitates the development of resilient systems capable of withstanding various disruptions. This qualitative study examines the impact of collaborative practices on supply chain resilience, providing an in-depth analysis of their contributions to the robustness and adaptability of supply chains. Through extensive interviews with industry professionals, including supply chain managers, logistics coordinators, and strategic planners, the study identifies key collaborative practices—such as information sharing, joint decision-making, and coordinated response strategies—that significantly enhance resilience. These practices facilitate proactive risk management, improve response times during disruptions, and foster innovation through shared knowledge and resources. Thematic analysis of the collected data reveals that strong relationships among supply chain partners and integrated approaches that leverage each participant's strengths are crucial for effective risk mitigation and recovery. Additionally, the study underscores the role of technology in enabling real-time information sharing and decision-making, which are essential for effective collaboration. The findings highlight the importance of investing in robust collaborative networks and adopting supportive technologies to enhance communication and coordination. This research contributes to the existing body of knowledge by offering a nuanced understanding of how strategic implementation of collaborative practices can build more resilient supply chains. It provides practical recommendations for businesses seeking to improve their resilience, emphasizing the qualitative aspects of collaboration and its impact on supply chain management. Overall, this study presents a comprehensive exploration of how collaboration can bolster supply chain resilience, offering valuable insights for practitioners and scholars focused on creating stable and sustainable supply chain operations in the face of growing uncertainties.
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 | 0.017 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".