MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Role of Collaborative Planning in Synchronizing Supply Chain and Marketing Activities: Insights from Multinational Companies

2024· preprint· en· W4400009760 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Holloway

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinational corporationBusinessSynchronizingSupply chainMarketingProcess managementSupply chain managementIndustrial organizationEngineeringFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative research investigates the role of collaborative planning in synchronizing supply chain and marketing activities among multinational companies (MNCs). Collaborative planning integrates traditionally separate functions to enhance operational efficiency, customer responsiveness, and strategic alignment. The study employs semi-structured interviews with key informants from diverse MNCs across industries and geographies to explore practices, challenges, and outcomes associated with collaborative planning initiatives. Findings highlight the pivotal role of cross-functional collaboration and advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence and big data analytics, in improving demand forecasting accuracy, optimizing inventory management, and enabling personalized marketing strategies. Challenges include organizational resistance, cultural barriers, and the complexity of aligning global strategies. Strategic outcomes encompass improved operational efficiency, cost savings, enhanced customer satisfaction, and strengthened competitive advantage. Moreover, the integration of sustainability goals underscores the importance of environmental responsibility and regulatory compliance in collaborative planning frameworks. The study also identifies emerging trends in digital transformation and agile supply chains shaping future practices. Overall, collaborative planning emerges as a strategic imperative for MNCs to navigate complexities, capitalize on opportunities, and sustain growth in a globalized marketplace.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicQuality and Supply ManagementFrench-language works237,207