MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238305964 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14645481

Design Principles For Retail Return Policies

2021· preprint· en· W4238305964 on OpenAlexaff
Konstantin Loutsenko

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSustainable Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityRoyal Ontario Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexCustomer satisfactionOrder (exchange)Product (mathematics)Process (computing)BusinessSupply chainMarketingIndustrial organizationComputer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on an analysis of prior literature on consumer behaviour and reverse logistics, this study proposes a model for the design of returns policies that includes considerations for costs, logistics requirements, and consumer behaviour. The case study investigations yielded several important findings. Product characteristic concerns seem to have a low level of importance in the decision-making process of return policy establishment. Practitioners that are responsible for creating effective return policies seem to not place great importance on either product characteristics or supply chain optimization. Using case analysis, this study explored the decision-making process of return policy creation and found that customer satisfaction and organization-specific concerns have a high level of importance in the returns creation process. The results indicate that the current models and frameworks for return policies need to be re-examined, in order to reflect the practical realities of the environment and constraints in which organizations operate. A review of the literature suggests that retailers consider a product's return policy a source of competitive advantage that can increase customer satisfaction and overall profitability. However, the existing research into returns policies focuses mainly on optimizing product flows and minimizing the financial cost of returns, rather than examining the inter-relationships between multiple constructs such as customer satisfaction, product characteristics, logistic constraints and consumer behaviour. This is problematic because it creates a disconnect between the considerations that the practitioners take into account and the considerations that are included in the current models for returns policy establishment. For retail organizations, the returns process can have a significant impact on costs and customer satisfaction due to the unique logistics costs and customer interactions in the returns process. Based on an analysis of prior literature on consumer behaviour and reverse logistics, this study proposes a research framework for the design of returns policies for retailers that considers the impacts of a specific return policy on costs, logistics requirements, and consumer behaviour. The study uses the proposed framework to identify, highlight, and catalog the different influences and considerations that retail and manufacturing organizations face during the creation of a return policy in the retail environment. The case study investigations yielded several important findings. First, product characteristic concerns seem to have a low level of importance in the decision-making process of return policy establishment. The study finds that practitioners that are responsible for creating effective return policies do not place great importance on either product characteristics or supply chain optimization. Second, this study found that most of the current models on return policy creation do not include customer satisfaction and organizational concerns. Using case analysis, this study explored the decision-making process of return policy creation in three retail organizations and found that customer satisfaction and organization-specific concerns actually have a high level of importance in the returns creation process. By using current models on return policy establishment and using empirical results, this study proposes a tentative theory by outlining the propositions for the design of a returns policy in retail organizations. The results of this study are based on organizational data as well as interviews conducted with persons who are directly involved in the returns process for their organization. The results indicate that the current models and frameworks for return policies need to be re-examined, in order to reflect the practical realities of the environment and constraints in which organizations operate.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSustainable Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207