E-fulfillment has a significant role to play within e-tailing, which provides products to a customer, comprising primarily of five components: website quality, customization strategy, distribution strategy, last mile delivery and return management. The purpose of this paper is to provide an e-fulfillment performance evaluation framework for an e-tailer, considering the different performance aspects of information systems (IS), marketing and operations for e-tailers.
Since quite a few performance aspects (i.e. IS, marketing system and operations) need to be factored in while evaluating the e-fulfillment performance, it may be considered as a complex multi-criteria decision-making problem. This study used decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) based analytic network process (DANP) to investigate the relationship between performance class and performance aspects, and calculated their weights. These designated weights of performance aspects help managers to find the important aspects needing improvement. The understanding of the interrelationship among the performance aspects enables managers to improve the efficiency of an e-tailing system.
This study provides the e-fulfillment performance evaluation framework to find the important aspects requiring improvement. The results of this study reveal that the important performance aspects of e-fulfillment performance are return policy, pickup method, innovativeness, assortment type, assortment width, trust (privacy and security) and promised delivery date.
This e-fulfillment performance evaluation could be used by an e-tailer to assess the e-fulfillment performance, and identify areas of improvement.
This study makes a contribution to the present body of knowledge by considering operations related performance aspects except the IS and marketing to evaluate the e-fulfillment performance.
Titiyal, R., Bhattacharya, S. and Thakkar, J.J. (2019), "E-fulfillment performance evaluation for an e-tailer: a DANP approach", International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 69 No. 4, pp. 741-773. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-12-2018-0459Download as .RIS
Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2019, Emerald Publishing Limited