MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exploring Collaborative Supplier Relationships in E-Commerce: A Qualitative Study on Partnership Dynamics

2024· preprint· en· W4400471623 on OpenAlexaff
Oliver Grant

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessGeneral partnershipSupply chainContext (archaeology)Knowledge managementE-commerceCompetitive advantageSustainabilityDynamic capabilitiesSupply chain managementProcess managementMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study explores collaborative supplier relationships within the context of e-commerce, aiming to uncover the dynamics, challenges, strategies, impacts, and future trends shaping these partnerships. Through thematic analysis of interviews with e-commerce platform managers, supplier representatives, and industry experts, the study identifies three primary types of relationships: transactional, relational, and strategic. Critical factors influencing these relationships include trust, effective communication, technological integration, and regulatory compliance. Challenges such as information asymmetry, cultural differences, logistical complexities, and competitive pressures are examined, alongside strategies for enhancing collaboration, including clear communication protocols, performance evaluations, and technological advancements. The findings highlight the significant impact of collaborative supplier relationships on business performance, including cost efficiencies, supply chain resilience, innovation capacity, customer satisfaction, and market competitiveness. Looking forward, trends in digital transformation, sustainability initiatives, global supply chain networks, resilience-building strategies, and industry collaboration are discussed as shaping the future landscape of e-commerce partnerships. Embracing these trends presents opportunities for organizations to innovate, adapt, and sustain growth in the competitive digital 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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.434
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.021 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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