International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

Younes Ettouzani; Nicola Yates; Carlos Mena

2012 International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

doi: 10.1108/09600031211225945

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present an investigation into the causes of promotional on‐shelf‐availability (on‐shelf‐availability) shortfalls in retailing. Design/methodology/approach – The research follows a multiple‐case study research design involving seven major retailers and four multinational food manufacturers operating in the UK. The data collection took the form of semi‐structured interviews with 110 practitioners across 24 sites. Observations and documentation were used as supporting evidence. Findings – Improving promotional on‐shelf‐availability presents retailers and manufacturers with a complex set of inter‐connected problems distributed across the supply chain. This research identified 32 causes affecting on‐shelf‐availability, grouped into eight themes, six of which are generic (forecasting, collaboration, replenishment, IT, distribution and production), and two which are specific to promotions (timescales and promotional process). This classification provides practitioners with a framework to improve promotional on‐shelf‐availability and academics with a more comprehensive range of the factors affecting on‐shelf‐availability, including two new themes not previously documented. Research limitations/implications – Although the number of cases does not allow statistical analysis, the size and scope of the organizations involved helps to underpin the generalizability of the findings. The volume of data collected for retailers is significantly higher than for manufacturers, although this only reflects the importance of retailers in ensuring on‐shelf‐availability. Practical implications – This paper presents a framework designed to provide a steer for further research into promotional on‐shelf‐availability and to help retail professionals to prioritize their actions towards improving promotional on‐shelf‐availability. Originality/value – While on‐shelf‐availability has been the subject of much research, promotional on‐shelf‐availability has not been investigated in significant depth. This research is, to our knowledge, the first to investigate the causes of poor promotional on‐shelf‐availability and expands the knowledge of the field by highlighting the similarities and differences between traditional on‐shelf‐availability and promotional on‐shelf‐availability. Given the increasing use of promotions as a competitive strategy this area of research is both timely and important.

Benjamin T. Hazen; Dianne J. Hall; Joe B. Hanna

2012 International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

doi: 10.1108/09600031211225954

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to identify the critical components of the reverse logistics (RL) disposition decision‐making process and suggest a decision framework that may guide future investigation and practice. Design/methodology/approach – The authors utilized a problem‐driven content analysis methodology. RL literature from 2000 through 2010 was content analyzed to determine which components may impact a firm's RL disposition decision. Findings – The authors extrapolated seven RL disposition decision components from a compilation of 60 variables identified in the literature. Practical implications and suggestions for future research are offered, and a RL disposition decision‐making framework is presented. Research limitations/implications – Although methodological techniques were carefully followed, the nature of a content analysis may be subject to author bias. Future investigation and use of the framework presented will verify the findings presented here. Practical implications – This study identifies seven components that should be considered when deciding which RL disposition alternative should be adopted and integrates these components into a decision‐making framework. Supply chain professionals who refer to this framework during the decision process will benefit from a more comprehensive analysis of potential RL disposition alternatives. Originality/value – Congruent with recent assertions suggesting that RL research is evolving from an operational‐level focus to a holistic business process approach for maximizing value recovery, this study synthesizes operational‐level research to develop a practical framework for RL disposition decision‐making.

Alex da Mota Pedrosa; Dag Näslund; Claudia Jasmand

2012 International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

doi: 10.1108/09600031211225963

Purpose – This paper aims to assess the quality of the case study based research approach as documented in articles published during the past 13 years, based on a synthesis of indicators for the quality criteria truth‐value, transferability, and traceability. Design/methodology/approach – Content analysis of 134 case study‐based articles published in six leading logistics and supply chain management (SCM) journals between 1998 and 2010 is used to assess and evaluate the quality of the case study‐based research approach as documented in these publications. Findings – This research provides an overview of the quality of the case study‐based research approach. Results show that the quality is generally low, supporting the ongoing, but empirically unsupported criticism on the quality of case study‐based research. The results also highlight which specific aspects authors and reviewers need to address to ensure high quality of the case study‐based research approach in published articles. Research limitations/implications – This study is limited to the analysis of published articles in six logistics and SCM journals. Further research should investigate different journals in logistics and other disciplines, and the relationship between the rigor of case study based research and its contribution to the field. Practical implications – The findings give guidance to authors and reviewers in developing articles with a high‐quality case study‐based research approach and help reviewers and readers to evaluate the quality of the described approach. Originality/value – The paper verifies the validity of ongoing claims for more rigor in case study‐based research and identifies areas of improvement.

Helena Forslund

2012 International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

doi: 10.1108/09600031211225972

Purpose – Logistics service providers (LSPs) are important actors for creating logistics performance in supply chains. However, there is little previous research on how they handle the performance management process. The purpose of this paper is to explore the handling of the performance management process and its obstacles from the perspective of LSPs. Design/methodology/approach – A multiple‐case study is conducted with the three largest LSPs in Sweden. Findings – The handling of the performance management process shows similarities among LSPs in selecting performance variables, defining metrics, and capturing real‐time data. The differences are found in target setting, in report‐making and analysing, and in the perceived demand for performance management. The following three perceived obstacles are found for supply chain performance management: lack of understanding and knowledge; poor capabilities for adapting performance metrics definitions; and lagging IT solutions for performance report ‐ making. The findings indicate possibilities for an increased supply chain scope where activities are handled by the partner that has the best capabilities, improving efficiency in supply chains. Research limitations/implications – The study contributes to performance management theory by providing exploratory knowledge of the supply chain performance management process and its obstacles from the perspective of three LSPs. The study focuses on large LSPs and has respondents at the managerial level. Practical implications – The study reveals differing supply chain performance management practices among LSPs, which implies that customers can choose an LSP that handles performance management in the way required. Originality/value – Little previous research includes LSPs in studies of supply chain performance management. In particular it is unusual to have the perspective of LSPs and apply case‐based methodology.