MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403037139 · doi:10.69554/otjr6502

Choosing the right sourcing model for thirdparty logistics outsourcing agreements

2024· article· en· W4403037139 on OpenAlexaff
Kate Vitasek, Andrew Downard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of supply chain management, logistics and procurement. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOutsourcing and Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutsourcingBusinessOperations managementIndustrial organizationMarketingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern outsourcing is more than a typical make–buy decision. Rather, there is a wide range of sourcing business models that today’s practitioners can choose from. Unfortunately, the fundamental nature of how goods and services are procured is not keeping pace with best practices of tapping into more mature sourcing business models; many business professionals wrongly assume that a transaction-based business model is the only way to architect a supplier contract. This paper provides an easy-to-understand framework for classifying the various contracting approaches along a sourcing continuum. A key goal of the paper is to help organisations understand the various models and see examples of how they are used in practice.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of supply chain management, logistics and procurement.Same topicOutsourcing and Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207