MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408764048 · doi:10.1002/joom.1362

Evolutions of Omni‐Channel Fulfillment Performance: An In‐Depth Case Study in Grocery Retailing

2025· article· en· W4408764048 on OpenAlexaff
Stuart Milligan, Iain Davies, Baris Yalabik, Melih Çelik, Brian Squire

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Operations Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Retail Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
FundersBritish Academy
KeywordsBusinessChannel (broadcasting)MarketingAdvertisingComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The rapid adoption of omni‐channel strategies has prompted grocery retailers to reconfigure their back‐end fulfillment operations to efficiently and effectively meet the demands of online and offline retail channels. Viewing back‐end fulfillment operations in omni‐channel grocery retail as a complex adaptive system, we present an eight‐year multi‐method case study of the UK operations of a leading global grocery retailer. Over this period the share of online sales significantly grew as proportion of overall sales. We observe four evolutions in the back‐end fulfillment complex adaptive system to respond to the operational demands associated with increasing online sales. Complex adaptive systems theory suggests that such evolutions should eventually lead to a state of equilibrium, where the system is reconfigured to effectively and efficiently respond to the market. However, we observe that this equilibrium was never achieved and propose this results from two opposing and irreconcilable environmental energies preventing optimal adaptation. Drawing on both in‐depth interviews and a proprietary fulfillment dataset from the organization, we expose the implications of conflicting energies being imported from the environment, and propose three strategies, drawn from paradox theory, for reconciling these energies within a complex adaptive system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.267 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Operations ManagementSame topicConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207