Advertisement

Sustainable Reverse Supply Chains for Retail Product Returns

  • Regina FreiEmail author
  • Sally-Ann Krzyzaniak
  • Lisa Jack
Chapter
Part of the Greening of Industry Networks Studies book series (GINS, volume 7)

Abstract

With online sales growing massively over the last few years, product returns have also increased significantly, and for a variety of reasons. However, most companies strongly underestimate the effort and costs necessary for dealing with these returns. The reverse supply chains and systems used are often ad-hoc and have many weaknesses; research has shown that sustainability is a topic still completely neglected in the area. This chapter contributes to identifying vulnerabilities, explains best practice, suggests ways to achieve further improvement and points out where further investigation is required. The findings are based on a comprehensive study involving 100 retailers’ online returns policies; a review of other existing studies; four in-depth case studies with major UK retailers, including over 25 interviews, observations and site visits; and structured interviews with another 17 retailers in the UK and Europe. Feedback was sought from retail industry consortia.

Keywords

Reverse supply chains Online retail Multi-channel/omni-channel Product returns Sustainability 

References

  1. Bell DR, Gallino S, Moreno A (2014) How to win in an omnichannel world. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 56(1):45–53Google Scholar
  2. Bernon M, Cullen J, Gorst J (2016) Online retail returns management: integration within an omni-channel distribution context. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 46(6/7):584–605.  https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-01-2015-0010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bower AB, Maxham JG III (2012) Return shipping policies of online retailers: normative assumptions and the long-term consequences of fee and free returns. J Mark 76:110–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brynjolfsson E, Hu YJ, Rahman MS (2013) Competing in the age of omnichannel retailing. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 54(4):23–29Google Scholar
  5. Douthit D, Flach M, Agarwal V (2011) A returning problem, reducing the quantity and cost of product returns in consumer electronics. http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/accenture-reducing-the-quantity-and-cost-of-customerreturns.pdf. Accessed 10 Oct 2018
  6. Ecommerce Foundation (2017) Global Ecommerce report 2017. https://www.ecommercefoundation.org/free-reports. Accessed 10 Oct 2018
  7. Eisenhardt KM, Graebner ME (2007) Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Acad Manag J 50(1):25–32.  https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2007.24160888 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eurostat (2018) Digital economy & society in the EU. A browse through our online world in figures. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/infographs/ict/2018/index.html. Accessed 10 Oct 2018
  9. Gallino S, Moreno A, Stamatopoulos I (2017) Channel integration, sales dispersion, and inventory management. Manag Sci 63(9):2813–2831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gao F, Su X (2017) Omnichannel retailing operations with buy-online-and-pickup-instore. Manag Sci 63(8):2478–2492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gnyawali DR, Park BJR (2011) Co-opetition between giants: collaboration with competitors for technological innovation. Res Policy 40(5):650–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Huang X, Gu JW, Ching WK, Siu TK (2014) Impact of secondary market on consumer return policies and supply chain coordination. Omega 45:57–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hübner A, Wollenburg J, Holzapfel A (2016) Retail logistics in the transition from multi-channel to omni-channel. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 46(67):562–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jack L, Frei R, Krzyzaniak SA (2019) Buy online, return to store; the challenges and opportunities of product returns in a multichannel environment. Project report. https://ecr-shrink-group.com
  15. KPMG (2017a) Future-proof your logistics. https://home.kpmg.com/au/en/home/insights/2017/05/future-proof-reverse-logistics.html. Accessed 10 Oct 2018
  16. Padula G, Dagnino GB (2007) Untangling the rise of coopetition: the intrusion of competition in a cooperative game structure. Int Stud Manag Organ 37(2):32–52.  https://doi.org/10.2753/IMO0020-8825370202 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rosenberg H (2018) Creating value from returns. Reverse Logist Mag., Edition 89 12(2):10–16Google Scholar
  18. Schwartz B (2006) More isn’t always better. Harv Bus Rev. June 84:22Google Scholar
  19. Sciarrotta T (2018) Directing reverse logistics – a corporate paradigm shift. Reverse Logist Mag., Edition 91 12(4):40–41Google Scholar
  20. Shi X, Dong C, Cheng TCE (2018) Does the buy-online-pick-up-in-store strategy with pre-orders benefit a retailer with the consideration of returns? Int J Prod Econ 206:134–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Spenner P, Freeman K (2012) To keep your customer, keep it simple. Harv Bus Rev. May 90:108–114Google Scholar
  22. Stuart B (2018) Wake up: returns are your fault, not the customers. Reverse Logist Mag., Edition 90 12(3):22–24Google Scholar
  23. The Retail Equation (2015) Return rate miscalculations impact retail chains nationwide calculating your real return rate. https://apprissretail.com/resource/white-paper-return-rate-miscalculations-impact-retail-chains-nationwide/ Accessed 10 Oct 2018
  24. Xu L, Li Y, Govindan K, Xu X (2015) Consumer returns polices with endogenous deadline and supply chain coordination. Eur J Oper Res 242:88–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Xue Y, Caliskan-Demirag O, Chen Y, Yu Y (2018) Supporting customers to sell used goods: profitability and environmental implications. Int J Prod Econ 206:220–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yin RK (2014) Case study research. Design and methods, 5th edn. Sage Publications, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of PortsmouthPortsmouthUK

Personalised recommendations