MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410567158 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18050284

Bullwhip Effect in Supply Chains and Cost Rigidity

2025· article· en· W4410567158 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hakjoon Song, Daqun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBullwhip effectSupply chainRigidity (electromagnetism)BusinessSupply chain managementMaterials scienceMarketingComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The bullwhip effect is the phenomenon of distorted information that causes the amplification of variability of demand in supply chains. We examine the relationship between the bullwhip effect and cost behavior using a large sample of U.S. public firms from 1980 to 2019. Our empirical results show that the costs of firms with a higher intensity of bullwhip effect are significantly more responsive to changes in sales, suggesting that firms facing higher amplification of demand will adopt a less rigid short-term cost structure with lower fixed and higher variable costs. Furthermore, the bullwhip effect is associated with a higher elasticity of number of employees, operating leases, and rental expenses with respect to sales. The findings of mediation analyses suggest that firms are likely to lease capacity resources to increase the flexibility and manage the operating risk associated with the bullwhip effect. The results are robust to alternative model specifications. This study contributes to both the cost accounting and supply chain management literature, and documents large sample evidence on whether and how the bullwhip effect affects a firm’s choice of cost structure.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementFrench-language works237,207