An exploration of antecedents and consequences of supplier connectedness in the Canadian agribusiness industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several theories argue that suppliers establish relationships with manufacturers leading to long term beneficial results for both parties.Market orientation theorists, on the other hand, assume that a market driven culture drives this long term orientation by acquiring mutual trust-norms-commitment in the relationship.However in this thesis, I introduce a new element to the relationship known as 'Connectedness'.I argue that Connectedness is a construct that goes far beyond trust-relationship norrns and commitment.Through the help of Transaction Cost Theory and Relationship Marketing Paradigm a concept known as Supplier Connectedness is defined in this thesis.With the help of these two theories, I then try to identify the antecedents þrecursors) and consequences that relate to Supplier Connectedness.For this thesis a model was presented with four hypotheses.The empirical testing was conducted by sending out a questionnaire to a sample of manufacturers in the Canadian Agribusiness Industry.The questionnaire (administered by mail) contained a variety of standardized marketing scales that were developed in prior marketing studies.The hypotheses were tested using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) estimates.The results were quite compelling that the study accepted the four hypotheses.The model was fully mediated through each other and did not have any indirect effects.These results meant that Supplier Connectedness was an outcome of trust, relational norms and commitment in the relationship.The study also found out that Supplier Connectedness was positively related to the supplier's perception of the manufacturer's market orientation that in turn affects the performance levels and the profitability of the manufacturer.The thesis outlined some limitations and some managerial recommendations about the construct of Supplier Connectedness and its effects towards the organization.The thesis concludes by identiffing some areas for possible future research in this area.
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 | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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.
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".