Skip to content
Search AI Powered

Latest Stories

On packaging and product returns …

In this article from the Journal of Business Logistics, the authors examine the impact of packaging presentation on the likelihood of returns.

The surge in e-commerce demand across the last year has disrupted many aspects of company supply chains, including the boxes they ship products in. The price of cardboard hit a record high in February according to the Producer Price Index, pointing to the sudden rise in demand for everything from food to pet supplies to clothing appearing at consumers’ front doors. But beyond cardboard’s newfound cost is another important box consideration: the appeal of packaging.

As more customers are shopping online than ever before, how might the presentation of a company’s packaging be affecting customer behavior? In their newly published paper, JBL authors Carl Marcus Wallenburg, Lukas Einmahl, Kang-Bok Lee, and Shashank Rao examine the impact of packaging presentation on the likelihood of returns in “On packaging and product returns in online retail – Mailing boxes or sending signals?


The returns process is widely regarded as incredibly costly for businesses in both time and money. An average return incident costs over $15 in shipping and handling expenses alone, which is compounded by both the fact that up to 50% of products sold online get returned and most returned products cannot be sold at full price. Due to the expensive nature, businesses naturally try to avoid returns as much as possible through two approaches: avoidance and gatekeeping. While gatekeeping seeks to prevent customers from making returns by imposing barriers, avoidance reduces the likelihood by attempting to mitigate reasons customers may have to return an item. In other words, companies take steps before the returns process to ensure a lower chance of a customer returning a product at all.

Packaging can be divided into two categories: primary and secondary packaging. Secondary or transport packaging is what’s intended to protect the products inside the primary packaging – it’s the cardboard box that you find on your doorstep or front porch. Primary packaging is inside, protecting the actual product. Previous research looking at presentation has demonstrated its influence on customer expectations, usually at the time of sale. But with everyone ordering things online, packaging’s importance has moved up, as a package’s arrival on a customer’s doorstep is the first time they will see the product in person.

It turns out that packaging presentation does influence the likelihood of a customer returning a product. Items shipped using some degree of visually enhanced packaging were 25.5% likely to be returned, compared to the 32.1% likely for their counterparts shipped in ordinary cardboard boxes – a 6.6% difference. And the effects of packaging on return reduction are substantially stronger for packaging that is uniformly premium. In other words, if a company continues shipping products in normal cardboard boxes for secondary packaging, but upgrades their primary, inside packaging to a premium standard like gift wrapping or tissue paper, their products will be 2.8% less likely to be returned than their plain counterparts. But those items sent in both premium primary and secondary packaging will still fare better.

For managers handling returns processes and order fulfillment, all of this means a more holistic approach to packaging. As opposed to focusing solely on functionality, packaging should be made to be consistently more aesthetically appealing. And the costs of returns pale in comparison to the costs of upgrading packaging: premium packaging costs retailers less than 10¢ per shipment. Investing in premium packaging reduces the likelihood of having customers return products ordered online, which means a chance to avoid costly returns processes, making it one of the better value-for-money last-mile improvements for online retailers.


Recent

More Stories

digital chain links

How to evaluate blockchain for your supply chain

In 2015, blockchain (the technology that makes digital currencies such as bitcoin work) was starting to be explored as a solution for supply chains. It promised cost savings, increased efficiency, and heightened transparency, among other benefits. For that reason, many companies were happy to run pilots testing blockchain for themselves. Today, these small-scale projects have been replaced by large-scale enterprise adoption of blockchain-based supply chain solutions. There are plenty of choices now for blockchain supply chain products, platforms, and providers. This makes the option to use blockchain available now to nearly everyone in the sector. This wealth of choice does, however, make it more difficult to decide which blockchain integration is best (or, indeed, if your organization needs to use it at all). To find the right blockchain, companies need to consider three factors: cost, sustainability, and the ultimate goal of trying new technology.

Choosing the right blockchain for an enterprise supply chain begins with the most basic consideration: cost. Blockchains work by securely recording “transactions,” and in a supply chain, those transactions are essentially database updates. However, making such updates has varying costs on different chains. If a container moves locations, that entry is updated, and a transaction is recorded. Enterprises need to figure out how many products, containers, or pieces of information they will process daily. Each of these can be considered a transaction. Now, some blockchains cost not even $1 to record a million movements. Other chains can cost thousands of dollars for the same amount of recording. Understanding the amount of activity you will need to record against the cost of transactions is the first place for an enterprise to start when considering blockchain. Ask the provider which blockchain their product is built on, and its average transaction cost. This will help you find the most cost-effective product or integration.

Keep ReadingShow less

Featured

A series of blocks. The first block is balanced on the edge so that it shows both "glob" and "loc" the rest of the blocks read "alization" to create the sense of both "globalizaiton" and "localization."

Balancing global sourcing and local availability can improve supply chain resiliency and sustainability.

Prazis Images via Adobe Stock

“Glocalization”: The path for navigating a volatile global supply chain

Over the last two decades, globalization became more intense, and with it, competition among companies and their supply networks. The constant fight for new sources of raw materials at a more competitive cost, the development of suppliers in low-cost countries, and the ability to manage logistic chains have become part of the routine of strategic sourcing.

In today's economic environment, companies are continuously pressured to reduce costs to combat slower growth; to offset increases in material prices, energy, and transportation; and to counterbalance various other pressures, such as inflation. Despite these issues and the economic instability worldwide, companies must continue to differentiate themselves and find growth opportunities to compete in the global marketplace. For example, in order to boost revenues and fuel growth, many companies are now under as much pressure to reduce product life cycles and speed-to-market as they are to find savings and reduce operational costs.

Keep ReadingShow less
An illustration of five trucks connected by lines and hubs to give the appearance of a network.

An advanced transportation management system can help with route optimization, real-time tracking, multimodal management, and predicting potential supply chain challenges.

Georgii courtesy of Adobe Stock

How an advanced TMS optimizes supply chain performance

A transportation management system (TMS) is a critical tool for all supply chain and logistics practitioners. It provides shippers, third-party logistics companies (3PLs), and fourth-party logistics providers (4PLs) with the visibility they need to manage the supply chain and optimize the movement of products and goods. There are various types of transportation management systems, and while using a basic TMS is better than no TMS at all, advanced transportation management systems offer enhanced functionality and can scale with you as your business grows.

Getting the right TMS in place can have considerable benefits, as a TMS helps with planning and executing the movement of goods on a comprehensive level, which aids in reducing the risks of disruptions at every point in the supply chain. Companies that better manage risk will see significant savings. Data from the supply chain risk intelligence company Interos found that of the organizations they surveyed in 2021, the average organization lost $184 million in global supply chain disruptions. Similarly, a McKinsey study found that, within 10 years, the cost of supply chain disruptions adds up to nearly half of a company’s profits.


Keep ReadingShow less
A rusty blue chain crosses in front of blue, red, and yellow containers.

Labor strikes can stop supply chains in their tracks unless companies take steps to build up resiliency.

huntspy via Adobe Stock

Strikes and labor negotiations highlight need for resilient supply chains

Strikes and potential strikes have plagued the supply chain over the last few years. An analysis of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics by the Economics Policy Institute concluded that the number of workers involved in major strike activity increased by 280% in 2023 from 2022. Currently, the U.S. East Coast and Gulf Coast ports are facing the threat of another dockworker strike after they return to the negotiating table in January to attempt to resolve the remaining wage and automation issues. Similarly, Boeing is continuing to contend with a machinists strike.

Strikes, or even the threat of a strike, can cause significant disruptions across the global supply chain and have a massive economic impact. For example, when U.S. railroads were facing the threat of a strike in 2022, many companies redirected their cargo to avoid work stoppages and unhappy customers. If the strike had occurred, it would have had a massive economic impact. The Association of American Railroads (AAR), estimated that the economic impact of a railroad strike could be $2 billion per day.

Keep ReadingShow less
An illustration of a campaign button that says, "Supply Chain Issues" lays on top of a U.S. flag.

Supply chain professionals should be aware of how the different policies proposed by the U.S. presidential candidates would affect supply chain operations.

Jon Anders Wiken via Adobe Stock

Assessing the U.S. election impact on supply chain policy

For both Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, the revival of domestic manufacturing is a key campaign theme and centerpiece in their respective proposals for economic growth and national security. Amid the electioneering and campaign pledges, however, the centrality of supply chain policy is being lost in the shuffle. While both candidates want to make the supply chain less dependent on China and to rebuild the American industrial base, their approaches will impact manufacturing, allied sectors, and global supply chains much differently despite the common overlay of protectionist industrial policy.

Both Trump’s “America First” and Harris’ “Opportunity Economy” policies call for moving home parts of supply chains, like those that bring to market critical products like semiconductors, pharmaceutical products, and medical supplies, and strengthening long-term supply chain resilience by discouraging offshoring. Harris’ economic plan, dubbed the “New Way Forward,” aims to close tax loopholes, strengthen labor rights, and provide government support to high-priority sectors, such as semiconductors and green energy technologies. Trump’s economic plan, dubbed “New American Industrialism,” emphasizes tariffs, corporate tax cuts, and easing of regulations.

Keep ReadingShow less