The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Developing a consensus definition of supply chain management: a qualitative study
Abstract
Purpose: Without the adoption of a uniform agreed upon definition of supply chain management (SCM), researchers and practitioners will not be able to “advance the theory and practice” of the discipline. An integrated definition of SCM would greatly benefit researchers' efforts to study the phenomenon of SCM and those practitioners attempting to implement SCM. This paper aims to address these issues. Design/methodology/approach: Using the qualitative analysis software NVivo, this study examines 166 definitions of SCM that have appeared in the literature to determine important components of an integrated definition of SCM. Findings: Three broad themes of SCM are identified, including: activities; benefits; and constituents/components. An encompassing definition of SCM is developed from the qualitative analysis of these definitions. Research limitations/implications: While a large number of SCM definitions have been included in the research design, there may be additional definitions that are excluded given the very large number of SCM publications. Practical implications: A consensus definition of SCM will allow researchers to more precisely develop theory and practitioners to identify the scope and boundaries of SCM. Originality/value: This paper is the first attempt to include a large number of SCM definitions for the purpose of developing a consensus definition of the concept. Previous literature has included only a subset of published SCM definitions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing
Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299405800302 · Cited by 22,355
Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001 · Cited by 20,772
Cited by
Artificial Intelligence in Supply Chain Management: A Systematic Literature Review
Toorajipour, R., Sohrabpour, V., Nazarpour, A., Oghazi, P., & Fischl, M. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.009 · Cited by 1,020
“(2010) use various AI techniques to propose a pricing system for diverse products and services, and Peterson and Flanagan (2009) use an ANN to suggest a pricing model with lower errors and greater precision. Two articles focus on segmentation: Casabayó et al. (2015) combine cluster analyses and fuzzy models to propose…”
MethodInfluentialLongoni, A., Luzzini, D., & Guerci, M. (2018) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3228-1 · Cited by 444
Metadata
- Authors
- Stock, J. R., & Boyer, S. L.
- Venue
- International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2009-09-04
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 690-711
- ISSN
- 0960-0035 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2093284774
- Cited by
- 462
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 21.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Developing a consensus definition of supply chain management: a qualitative study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/09600030910996323
- The paper
- Stock, J. R., & Boyer, S. L. (2009). Developing a consensus definition of supply chain management: a qualitative study. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030910996323
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.