Reverse logistics disposition decision‐making: Developing a decision framework via content analysis

Abstract

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.

Citation

Hazen, B.T., Hall, D.J. and Hanna, J.B. (2012), "Reverse logistics disposition decision‐making: Developing a decision framework via content analysis", International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 244-274. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600031211225954