Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 599

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

COMPETITIVE PRIORITIES: INVESTIGATING THE NEED FOR TRADE‐OFFS IN OPERATIONS STRATEGY

BOYER, KENNETH K., LEWIS, MARIANNE W.·2002·Production and Operations Management

Abstract

A heated debate continues over the need for trade‐offs in operations strategy. Some researchers call for plants to focus on a single manufacturing capability and devote their limited resources accordingly, while others claim that advanced manufacturing technology (amt) enables concurrent improvements in quality, cost, flexibility, and delivery. Yet there is little empirical evidence for or against the trade‐off model. In response, this study addresses the question: “To what extent do manufacturing plants view competitive priorities as trade‐offs?” We employ survey data collected from managers and operators in 110 plants that have recently implemented AMT. Our findings suggest that trade‐offs remain. However, perceived differences in competitive priorities are subtle and may vary across levels of the plant hierarchy.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1937-5956.2002.tb00181.x

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 599

Metadata

Authors
BOYER, K. K., & LEWIS, M. W.
Venue
Production and Operations Management
Published
2002-01-03
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
9-20
ISSN
  • 1059-1478 (ISSN-L)
  • 1937-5956
OpenAlex
W2096056122
Cited by
599
References
0
FWCI
24.38
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: COMPETITIVE PRIORITIES: INVESTIGATING THE NEED FOR TRADE‐OFFS IN OPERATIONS STRATEGY. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2002.tb00181.x
The paper
BOYER, K. K., & LEWIS, M. W. (2002). COMPETITIVE PRIORITIES: INVESTIGATING THE NEED FOR TRADE‐OFFS IN OPERATIONS STRATEGY. Production and Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2002.tb00181.x

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.