Exploring the Impact of Supplier Relationship Management on E-Commerce Delivery Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Supplier Relationship Management (SRM) plays a pivotal role in enhancing delivery performance within the e-commerce sector, yet understanding its nuanced impacts remains crucial for optimizing operational efficiencies and customer satisfaction. This qualitative research explores the intricate dynamics of SRM in e-commerce, focusing on strategic alignment, technological integration, trust, collaboration, and risk management as key determinants of delivery reliability. Through in-depth interviews and thematic analysis, the study reveals that strategic alignment of supplier capabilities with firm objectives is fundamental for maintaining a responsive and synchronized supply chain. Technological integration, including AI-driven analytics and blockchain applications, emerges as critical for real-time monitoring and adaptive decision-making, thereby improving delivery accuracy and efficiency. Trust and collaboration are identified as essential pillars for building resilient supplier relationships, fostering transparent communication and joint problem-solving. Effective risk management practices, such as supplier diversification and contingency planning, mitigate disruptions and ensure consistent delivery performance. Despite these benefits, challenges such as technological adoption barriers, cultural differences, communication complexities, resource constraints, and supplier reliability issues persist, necessitating strategic interventions. Recommendations include investing in advanced SRM technologies, promoting cultural understanding, enhancing communication protocols, allocating adequate resources, and fostering collaborative initiatives with suppliers. These strategies aim to overcome challenges and optimize SRM practices, ultimately enhancing delivery performance and competitiveness in the e-commerce landscape.
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 | 0.014 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".