MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7125223907 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v27i6.8083

Ford Motor Company: Reshoring Amid Escalating Tariffs –– Balancing Higher Costs With Supply Chain Resilience and Localized Incentives: Business School Case Study

2025· article· W7125223907 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jeffrey Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional resilience and development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTariffAutomotive industrySupply chainGallon (US)Port (circuit theory)Government (linguistics)Resilience (materials science)Capital (architecture)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sarah Chen reviewed the tariff impact spreadsheet one more time, the numbers stubbornly unchanged from her previous three reviews that morning. As Vice President of North American Manufacturing Operations at Ford Motor Company, she had managed through supply chain disruptions, semiconductor shortages, and pandemic shutdowns. But the challenge before her on this May morning in 2025 was different—it required not just operational agility, but a fundamental strategic choice about Ford’s manufacturing footprint for years to come. The catalyst was unambiguous: new Section 232 tariffs implemented in April 2025 imposed a 25% duty on imported automobiles and certain automotive parts.¹ For Ford, which manufactured approximately 20% of its North American volume in Mexico—including high-demand models like the Bronco Sport and Maverick at the Hermosillo plant and the Mustang Mach-E at Cuautitlán—the tariffs represented a potential $2.0-2.5 billion annual cost impact.² While the Trump administration had granted certain exemptions for components that couldn’t be sourced domestically, complete vehicles remained subject to the full tariff. Chen had three weeks to present her recommendation to Ford’s Executive Leadership Team. The decision would impact thousands of jobs on both sides of the border, require potentially billions in capital investment, and shape Ford’s competitive position in the rapidly evolving automotive market. As she gazed out her Dearborn office window toward the historic River Rouge Complex—itself a symbol of Ford’s manufacturing legacy—she considered the irony: the company that pioneered modern manufacturing efficiency now faced a choice between economic optimization and political-economic realities. What should Chen recommend, and how should she weigh the competing factors of cost, resilience, political positioning, and long-term strategic flexibility?

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicRegional resilience and developmentFrench-language works237,207