MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304688952 · doi:10.1287/msom.2022.1156

Go Wide or Go Deep? Assortment Strategy and Order Fulfillment in Online Retail

2022· article· en· W4304688952 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueManufacturing & Service Operations Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrder (exchange)BusinessSet (abstract data type)MarketingRelevance (law)Product (mathematics)Service (business)Process (computing)Order fulfillmentComputer scienceEconometricsEconomicsSupply chainMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Problem definition: Expansions in product assortment by online retailers often engender operational challenges. In undertaking such expansions, retailers exercise a strategic choice between expanding assortment width or depth. Our understanding of how this choice affects the order fulfillment process is limited. Thus, we examine the impact of these dimensions of assortment strategy on order delivery timeliness. Academic/practical relevance: Order delivery timeliness is a critical measure of operational success in online retail. We contribute to theory and practice by adopting a multidimensional perspective of retailer assortment strategy and studying the relative impact of assortment width and depth on order delivery timeliness. Methodology: Employing a data set comprising more than 200 million orders, we study the effects of assortment strategy on delivery timeliness using an instrumental variable approach. We then utilize a two-stage model to estimate the impact of delivery performance on sales. Further, we employ a matched difference-in-differences and a novel Bayesian structural time-series model to confirm this relationship. Results: We find that assortment width has a greater negative impact on order delivery timeliness compared with assortment depth. A one-standard-deviation increase in assortment width increases average delivery times by 0.55 days. Further, we find this effect to be positively moderated (i.e., worsened) by the average size of orders and to be negatively moderated (i.e., improved) by the logistic service provider’s (LSP) experience. Finally, a one-day increase in delivery times for 10% of the orders results in a 2.7% reduction in sales. Managerial implications: Our findings suggest that online retailers focused on ensuring timely deliveries should be wary of widening product assortments, especially when facing larger average order sizes. We also find that experienced logistic service providers can help mitigate the dilatory effects of assortment width expansions. However, the benefits of experienced LSPs are limited for retailers deepening their assortments. History: This paper has been accepted as part of the 2018 MSOM Data Driven Research Challenge. Supplemental Material: The online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2022.1156 .

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.205 · 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