Building Sustainable Supplier Relationships in E-commerce: A Qualitative Study on Best Practices and Strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study explores the intricacies of building sustainable supplier relationships in the e-commerce sector, focusing on best practices and strategic approaches. Through in-depth interviews with procurement managers, supply chain experts, and supplier representatives, the research identifies four critical themes: trust, technology integration, ethical practices, and performance measurement. Trust is found to be the foundation of effective supplier relationships, fostering open communication and collaboration, which are essential for addressing challenges and co-creating solutions. The integration of digital technologies such as supply chain management software, blockchain, and the Internet of Things significantly enhances transparency, decision-making, and operational efficiency, providing a competitive edge. Ethical practices, including adherence to fair labor standards and environmental sustainability, are increasingly crucial as consumer and regulatory expectations evolve, necessitating alignment between e-commerce companies and their suppliers. Performance measurement and continuous improvement are vital for maintaining quality and efficiency, with clear metrics and regular evaluations driving constructive feedback and optimization of supply chain processes. The study underscores the interdependence of these elements in fostering resilient and adaptable supplier relationships. The findings offer practical guidance for e-commerce businesses and suppliers, emphasizing the need for a holistic approach to supplier management that balances trust, technology, ethics, and performance. This approach not only enhances operational effectiveness but also ensures the long-term sustainability of supplier relationships in the dynamic e-commerce landscape. The research contributes to the theoretical understanding of supplier relationship management, providing a comprehensive framework for future studies and practical applications in the e-commerce industry.
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 | 0.020 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".