You are on page 1of 75

1PL vALuA1lCn Cl 1lML SLC1

uLLlvL8?

Master thesis submitted to the faculty of Economics and Business Administration in
fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science

Amsterdam, October 2013
Masters’ Thesis
MSc Business Administration,
Specialization Transport & Supply
Chain Management
VU University Amsterdam
Faculty of Economics & Business
Administration

Author: Sohrab Hosseinzadeh
Registration number: 2506874

First reader and supervisor: Dr. ir. J. P. van den Berg
Second reader: Prof. dr. ir. S.L.J.M. de Leeuw



2
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgement ...................................................................................................................... 4
Management Summary ............................................................................................................... 5
Management samenvatting ......................................................................................................... 6
1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 7
1.1. Background ................................................................................................................... 7
1.2. Research aim ................................................................................................................. 9
1.3. Problem definition and research question ..................................................................... 9
1.4. Theoretical and managerial contribution .................................................................... 11
1.4.1. Theoretical contribution ........................................................................................ 11
1.4.2. Managerial contribution ........................................................................................ 11
1.5. Thesis outline .............................................................................................................. 12
2. Theoretical framework ...................................................................................................... 13
2.1. Important preferences of consumers regarding time slot delivery .............................. 13
2.2. Consumer characteristics and product types ............................................................... 19
2.2.1. Consumer characteristics ...................................................................................... 19
2.2.2. Product types ........................................................................................................ 21
2.3. Incentives for time slot delivery selection .................................................................. 23
2.3.1. Use of incentives on time slot delivery service .................................................... 23
2.3.2. Improve time slot selection with revenue management ....................................... 26
2.4. Hypotheses and research model .................................................................................. 29
2.5. Research model ........................................................................................................... 32
3. Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 33
3.1. Survey ......................................................................................................................... 33
3.2. Measurements ............................................................................................................. 33
3.3. Data analysis ............................................................................................................... 34


3
3.3.1 Conjoint analysis ................................................................................................... 35
3.3.1. Hypotheses testing ................................................................................................ 37
4. Results ............................................................................................................................... 39
4.1. Descriptive statistics ................................................................................................... 39
4.2. Validity and reliability ................................................................................................ 40
4.3. Conjoint analysis ......................................................................................................... 41
4.4. Hypotheses analyses ................................................................................................... 44
4.5. Additional analyses ..................................................................................................... 48
5. Discussion and conclusion ................................................................................................ 51
5.1. Discussion ................................................................................................................... 51
5.2. Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 54
5.3. Limitation .................................................................................................................... 57
5.4. Future research ............................................................................................................ 57
6. References ......................................................................................................................... 58
Appendix A. Questionnaire ...................................................................................................... 62
Appendix B. Overview index cards ......................................................................................... 66
Appendix C. Index cards .......................................................................................................... 67
Appendix D. Product types and delivery fees .......................................................................... 74
Appendix E. Map distribution respondents .............................................................................. 75





4
ACknCWLLuCLMLn1

This thesis concludes my Masters’ degree in Business Administration at the VU University
Amsterdam. My specialization over the past year has been Transport and Supply Chain
Management, resulting in and enabling me to write this thesis about time slot delivery service.
I personally believe that this delivery option is one of the most important solutions for the
last-mile delivery problem of online retailers. I would like to express my appreciation for all
the support I received during my graduation. I would like to thank a few persons specifically
for their support. First of all, my special thanks are for my supervisor Prof. dr. ir. S.L.J.M. de
Leeuw. It is thanks to his valuable feedback that I have been able to complete this thesis. I
would also like to thank Prof. dr. H. van Herk for her guidance in designing the questionnaire
and her support in finding the right methodology for this research. The questionnaire used in
this thesis was created under the guidance of PhD student Silvia Milanova, I would like to
thank her for her valuable insights. This research could not be presented in this context
without the very useful feedback of Liedewij Jepsen, special thanks for her adjustments and
time she spent in reading my thesis.
Finally, I would like to thank everyone else who supported me in writing this thesis and
completing my Master of Science in Business Administration.

Sohrab Hosseinzadeh
October, 2013



5
MAnACLMLn1 SuMMA8?

Purpose – The purpose of this thesis is to measure the valuation of consumers in terms of
investing time, and investing money, of the willingness to pay (WTP) for time slot delivery of
parcels. This service allows consumers to choose a predefined time slot for a parcel to be
delivered and it could enable online retailers to establish an efficient and effective last-mile in
the delivery process.
Design/methodology/approach – After a literature review, the thesis measures and analyses
the WTP for this service based on empirical research. A conjoint analysis method is used to
reveal the overall preference of the respondents for attribute levels price, time slot length and
during which part of the day the delivery would take place (daytime or evening).
Findings – Based on the findings from the empirical research, important insights are derived
that can guide online retailers in their decision to offer this service to consumers. One of the
interesting findings is the relative importance of delivery fees. This is 68% when respondents
make their choice between different time slots whereas the relative importance of the time slot
length is only 22 %. This research shows that the valuation of time slot delivery service for
different product groups is the same, but the willingness to pay decreases when the price of
the product increases. This research reveals that consumers with a higher education are more
willing to pay for time slot delivery service than lower educated consumers.
Originality/value – This research has investigated the time slot delivery service from the
consumers’ perspective, providing valuable insights for online retailers and logistics service
providers.
Limitation – The number of attribute cards presented to the respondents was limited to 5 cards
per respondent reducing the generalization.
Keywords: Parcel delivery service, Time slot delivery service, Willingness to pay,
Consumers’ valuation, Conjoint analysis, E-fulfilment, Consumer characteristics.



6
MAnACLMLn1 SAMLnvA11l nC

Doel: Het doel van deze studie is om de waardering van klanten voor tijdvaklevering te meten
en om vast te stellen in hoeverre zij bereid zijn om te betalen voor de mogelijkheid om hun
pakketten op een bepaald tijdstip te laten bezorgen in een maatschappij waar internet
winkelen steeds belangrijker wordt. Deze service stelt klanten in staat om te kiezen voor een
vooraf vastgesteld tijdstip en het stelt winkeliers in staat om een efficiënt en effectief
afleveringsproces in te voeren.
Ontwerp/methodiek/aanpak: Na een literatuuroverzicht, wordt in deze studie de bereidheid
gemeten om voor deze service tijd en geld te investeren, door middel van empirisch
onderzoek. Een conjoint analyse methodiek is gebruikt om de algemene voorkeur van de
respondenten vast te stellen voor kenmerkende eigenschappen zoals prijs, tijdstip en
gedurende welk deel van de dag (overdag of ’s avonds) de aflevering plaats kan vinden.
Uitkomst: Aan de uitkomsten van het empirisch onderzoek kunnen belangrijke inzichten
worden ontleend die online winkeliers kunnen helpen in hun beslissing al dan niet deze
service aan hun klanten te bieden. Een interessante uitkomst is het relatieve belang van de
prijs voor deze service. Respondenten gaven aan de prijs voor 68% belangrijk te vinden bij
het kiezen van een tijdvak terwijl de lengte van het tijdvak voor slechts 22 % belangrijk is.
Het onderzoek geeft aan dat de bereidheid om van deze service gebruik te maken voor
verschillende productgroepen hetzelfde is, maar dat de bereidheid om voor deze service te
betalen afneemt naarmate de prijs van het product toeneemt. Het onderzoek laat zien dat de
hoger opgeleide consumenten eerder bereid zijn te betalen voor tijdvak levering dan lager
opgeleide consumenten.
Originaliteit: Deze studie heeft tijdvaklevering onderzocht vanuit het oogpunt van de klant.
Online winkeliers en logistieke dienstverleners kunnen met de waardevolle inzichten hun
service verbeteren/optimaliseren.
Beperking: Het aantal kaartjes met kenmerkende eigenschappen dat aan de respondenten is
gepresenteerd was beperkt tot 5, hierdoor vermindert generaliseerbaarheid van dit onderzoek.
Keywords: Parcel delivery service, Time slot delivery service, Willingness to pay,
Consumers’ valuation, Conjoint analysis, E-fulfilment, Consumer characteristics.



7
1. ln18CuuC1l Cn
The use of Internet by consumers to purchase their products continues to grow. In the first
half of 2012 consumers in the Netherlands spent ! 4.6 billion online, this is an increase of 9%
compared to 2011 (CBS, 2012). Next to the pure Internet retailers, today many traditional
retailers offer an online sales channel (Ehmke, 2012). This growth causes different challenges
for Internet retailers and their logistics service providers. Consumers are able to compare
online retailers’ products and services with minimal time and effort. This is possible because
of the fact that online business competitors are only a few mouse clicks away (Chiang &
Dholakia, 2003; Srinivasan, Anderson, & Ponnavolu, 2002). In order to retain consumers,
online retailers should focus on offering high quality products and services, including the
order fulfilment service of purchased goods (Rao, Griffis, & Goldsby, 2011). The reputation
of online retailers is made (or broken) by their ability to get it right for the customer the first
time (Morrell, 2000). Consumers base their memory of an experience on both the peak and
the ending moment (Degeratu, Rangaswamy, & Wu, 2000; Kahneman, Fredrickson,
Schreiber, & Redelmeier, 1993). For example if a consumer has a positive experience on a
website, but then the delivery goes badly, they may negatively over-react to the experience
and could be less likely to order from the website in the future (Dholakia et al., 2010).
1. 1. 8ACkC8Cunu
While the consumer can control the purchase process up until and including the payment, the
retailer and the logistics service provider decide how and when the products are shipped and
delivered. Research has shown that the quality of order fulfilment experienced by the
consumer has a great influence on satisfaction and retention of online consumers (Boyer &
Hult, 2005; Davis-Sramek, Mentzer, & Stank, 2008). Research by Rao et al. (2011) on the
relation between order fulfilment failures and subsequent purchase behaviour revealed that
poor performance of the order fulfilment process has a significant negative impact on the
future order quantity and order value of consumers who experienced a delay in delivery of
their orders.
The last-mile is regarded as one of the most expensive, least efficient and most polluting
sections of the entire supply chain (Gevaers, Voorde, & Vanelslander, 2011; Tarn, Razi, Wen,
& Perez, 2003). The “not-at-home problem” is one of the inherent factors that leads to
complex planning within the last-mile to the consumers. The functionality of home delivery is
crucial for online shopping business models and a key factor for economic success (Ehmke &
Mattfeld, 2012).


8
One of the possible delivery options is “attended home delivery”, which is the focus of this
research, where consumers must be present for delivery due to security reasons, goods being
perishable, goods being physically large or because a service is performed (Agatz, Campbell,
Fleischmann, & Savels, 2008). The most substantial last-mile issue occurs in home deliveries
requiring a signature of receipt. If the consumer is not at home, the parcel may have to be
presented two or three times before it is successfully delivered, each failure to deliver
representing a substantial cost increase for the last-mile of the logistics service provider
(Gevaers et al., 2011). The solution for efficient and consumer-oriented last-mile delivery is
challenging, especially in case of attended home deliveries as will be explained in this thesis.
Consumers expect that the delivery of the parcels is as immediate as online ordering (Tarn et
al., 2003) – in case of home deliveries, within a tight delivery time slot. To avoid delivery
failures, it is customary in attended home delivery services for company and consumer to
mutually agree on narrow delivery time slots (Campbell & Savelsbergh, 2006).
Time slot delivery of parcels implies that the consumer is able to choose a pre-defined time
slot in which the parcel will be delivered, for example Thursday between 8 and 10 a.m.
(Goebel, Moeller, & Pibernik, 2012). Time slot delivery is an “enormous logistical challenge
because of the unpredictability of demand coupled with strict delivery windows and low profit
margin products” (Campbell & Savelsbergh, 2006). Internet retailers considering this
approach will have to decide which services they are going to offer to which customer. It is
relevant to understand how consumers value the timeslot delivery service. Traditionally,
retailers assume that consumers will stay at home all day to receive their parcels, but
consumers are more demanding nowadays and expect tailored delivery services (GCI, 2008;
Tarn et al., 2003). It is valuable to understand what consumers are willing to pay for time slot
delivery of their parcels and which time slots lengths and delivery fees consumers prefer
(Bechwati, 2011). The empirical research in this thesis will reveal the preferences of the
consumers with regard to time slot delivery features (e.g. price and length of the time slot).
Market penetration is crucially important for the success of time slot delivery service. If only
a small group of consumers uses the time slot delivery service, the cost will increase
substantially (Gevaers et al., 2011). It is relevant to know which incentives are needed for
consumers to use time slot delivery at a sufficient level in order to create a balanced trade-off
between costs and customer service. This thesis will explain how the concept of revenue
management could be applied for time slot delivery service in order to achieve this balance.


9
1. 2. 8esearch al m
In the last decade ample studies (Agatz et al., 2013; Agatz, Campbell, Fleischmann, &
Savelsbergh, 2011; Ehmke, 2012; Kull, Boyer, & Calantone, 2007; Xing, Grant, McKinnon,
& Fernie, 2010) have discussed the time slot delivery service for online purchases. These
studies focused on how to establish such a service and which factors are important, but these
researches were set up from the point of view of retailers. Only a few studies involved the
consumers’ point of view in their research. Goebel et al. (2012) have conducted a research
whether consumers are prepared to invest more or less effort or money in receiving their
parcel with time slot delivery service. The aim of this thesis is to gain insight into consumers’
point of view concerning the time slot delivery service for different products purchased online
and to investigate which time slot features are important for consumers selecting a time slot
delivery option. This thesis aims to bridge the gap by analysing which variables (e.g.
consumer characteristics and product type) influence consumers’ valuation of time slot
delivery service.
1. 3. Þ8C8LLM uLll nl 1l Cn Anu 8LSLA8CP CuLS1l Cn
Based on the importance of the last-mile delivery for e-commerce, as illustrated in the
introduction this research will investigate this specific service (i.e. time slot delivery service)
towards the consumers. Two main streams motivate this research:
(1) The scope of this research is primarily inspired by the paper of Goebel et al.
(2012), which investigates the willingness to pay (WTP) in Germany for time slot
delivery of products ordered online. According to Goebel et al. (2012) estimating the
correct WTP for time slot delivery is a crucial task before launching such a service.
(2) Retailers should make sure that the available time slots cover the preferences of the
different consumer characteristics, such as assuring availability of evening slots in
areas with many busy professionals who are not at home during day hours (Agatz et
al., 2013). This research will investigate which consumer characteristics are important
for time slot delivery service and reveal the preferences of the consumers with regard
to time slot delivery features (e.g. price and length of the time slot).
From these two streams, the main research question (RQ) is formulated as follows:
RQ: How do different consumers value time slot delivery service for various product groups
purchased online?


10
To answer the main research question, a number of sub-questions (SQ) will be addressed:
SQ1. According to literature, which preferences regarding time slot delivery service
are important for consumers?
SQ2. According to literature, which consumer characteristics and product types are
relevant for time slot delivery service?
SQ3. According to literature, which incentives can be used to influence consumers in
time slot selection?
SQ4. Which variables influence the willingness to pay of consumers for time slot
delivery service?
This thesis begins with a review of relevant literature to answer the sub-question 1 until 3. A
literature search is carried out in scientific databases like webofknowledge.com,
emeraldinsight.com, jstor.org, and sciencedirect.com. Keywords used for this search were,
consumer preferences, parcel delivery service, e-fulfilment, time slot delivery service,
revenue management, e-commerce, consumer characteristics and product types. The search
results are filtered, jugged and organized based on the content (results were over 100
scientific articles). This method is applied for the sub-questions that need to be answered with
a literature review. For each of the keywords some specific words are used to search through
the database. The most important sub-words are displayed in Figure 1.1. Based on this review
hypotheses are developed regarding factors that influence consumers’ willingness to pay for
time slot delivery service. These hypotheses are tested with data obtained from a survey under
300 Dutch consumers. The results will provide an answer to sub-question 4.
WTP Time Slot
Delivery
E-commerce
Consumer Preference
Revenue Management Consumer characteristics
E-fulfillment Product types
Online retail
Demographics
Product categories
Psychographics
Attended home delivery
Price differentiation
Last-mile
Product attributes
Consumer choice models
Multi-channel
Time slot differentiation
Trade-offs
PDSQ
Incentives
Shopping online
Intention to shop online
Classification methods
Socioeconomic variables

Figure 1.1 Keywords used for literature review



11
1. 4. 1PLC8L1l CAL Anu MAnACL8l AL CCn18l 8u1l Cn
1. 4. 1. 1PLC8L1l CAL CCn18l 8u1l Cn
The theoretical contribution of this thesis is the empirical study, which will be conducted
under consumers in the Netherlands. The study aims to contribute to the scientific research
concerning the willingness to pay for time slot delivery service and offer insight into the
valuation of the time slot delivery service by the consumers. Also, the generalization of the
research conducted by Goebel et al. (2012) in Germany which provides insight in consumers’
willingness to pay for this service and the important drivers of its attractiveness. This thesis
will investigate how much time and money consumers are prepared to invest in receiving their
parcels ordered online.
1. 4. 2. MAnACL8l AL CCn18l 8u1l Cn
This thesis aims to give managerial decision makers insight in which types of products they
can offer the time slot delivery service and what they can charge the consumers for this
service. The incentives that drive the consumers to use the time slot delivery service will be
discussed in this thesis. The information for this thesis will be obtained from available
literature and the results of an empirical research under Dutch consumers. For companies
aiming to implement such a delivery service, this research offers guidance on the adoption of
the time slot delivery service to their fulfilment service.


12
1. 3. 1PLSl S Cu1Ll nL
In this paragraph the thesis outline of the research is presented. In chapter 2 the theoretical
framework will be discussed, which leads to a framework of the research model. In this
chapter the non-empirical research questions will be addressed. The methodology is presented
in chapter 3, where the data collection methods and analysis methods are explained which
then forms the input for the next chapter. The results and the findings related to the
hypotheses will be discussed in chapter 4. The findings will be concluded and discussed in
chapter 5. This chapter will also discuss the limitation of the research and will provide
directions for future research. This outline is presented in figure 1.2

1. Introduction:
Background
Research aim
& Questions
2. Theoretical
Framework:
Product Types
3.Methodology
Data collection
& analyzing
4. Empirical
Results
5. Conclusion
& Discussion
2. Theoretical
Framework:
Consumers’
Preference
2. Theoretical
Framework:
Consumer
Characteristics




Figure 1.2 Outline of the thesis



13
2. 1PLC8L1l CAL l8AMLWC8k
In this chapter the sub-questions will be answered with the available literature. The outline of
this chapter is structured by the subsequence of the sub-questions. Paragraph 2.1 addresses the
important preferences for consumers with regard to time slot delivery. Paragraph 2.2
discusses the different product types and consumer characteristics. In paragraph 2.3 the use of
incentives for time slot delivery service are discussed and explains how revenue management
concepts could be applied for an efficient e-fulfilment process. The hypotheses for the
empirical research are formulated in paragraph 2.4 which will be investigated in further
empirical research. Paragraph 2.5 presents the hypotheses in a research model.
2. 1. l MÞC81An1 Þ8LlL8LnCLS Cl CCnSuML8S 8LCA8ul nC 1l ML SLC1 uLLl vL8?
Consumers will evaluate the entire e-commerce process when they are making the decision
whether to utilize the Internet or to shop at the nearest retailer, meaning that a consumer
assesses the trade-off between the potentially lower transaction costs online (Bechwati, 2011;
Brynjolfsson, Hu, & Rahman, 2009) and the expected effort for receiving the product (Goebel
et al., 2012). This paragraph highlights the preferences concerning time slot delivery service
that are important for the consumers. The related sub-question for this paragraph is:
SQ1. According to literature, which preferences regarding time slot delivery service
are important for consumers?

This sub-question focuses on preferences related to time slot delivery service, the trade-offs
between pickup and delivery are discussed in the thesis of M. Heikamp concerning Service
Delivery Pricing In E-fulfilment.
Online shopping has a great potential of increasing consumer value directly from the
consumers’ home by providing 24/7 access to a huge assortment (Agatz et al., 2013). Apart
from the price of a product, consumers take two other factors into consideration when they
purchase online, product performance and order fulfilment (Reichheld & Schefter, 2000). As
mentioned in the previous section, online retailers’ success often hinges upon how efficiently
and effectively they are able to deliver products to the end consumers (Rao et al., 2011;
Sharman, 1984). For some offerings (e.g. cleaning or cooking), consumers can decide whether
to invest time in self-service or to invest money in acquiring a certain good or service (Okada
& Hoch, 2004). This principle also applies to fulfilment of online ordered products.


14
Consumers can decide upfront how
much money they are willing to
pay for the different fulfilment
services and how much time and
effort they are willing to spend to
receive an order (Bechwati, 2011).
Many consumers will no longer
accept full day delivery slots, some
of todays’ Internet retailers use one to four hours’ delivery time slots. (Agatz et al., 2013).
The trade-off between time and money will be further investigated in the empirical research.
The time slot delivery choice gives rise to cost-service trade-offs, like a narrow time slot
provides certainty to the consumer but in general implies higher costs for the retailer by
limiting the retailers flexibility and making the planning of the deliveries more complicated
(Agatz et al., 2013). Boyer et al. (2006) have simulated various effects of delivery window
sizes, the results are illustrated in Figure 2.1, which indicates that an increase of window
length means a decrease in miles per consumer. Therefore costs will rise as more and tighter
delivery windows (time slots) are incorporated into the delivery process (Agatz et al., 2013).
From a consumers’ perspective, a well-balanced offering of time slots over a day and over the
week is required (Agatz, Campbell, et al., 2008). Effective delivery service requires a good
understanding of consumer preferences and the flexibility to tailor service proposition to them
(Agatz et al., 2013), therefore this research will investigate these preferences.
Consumers expect competitive prices, quality products, fast delivery for the online purchases
and real-time information about their order status (Krueger, 2000; Tarn et al., 2003). Internet
retailers could meet the consumers’ satisfaction by providing broader assortments with
accurate availability and timeliness delivery (Cachon, Terwiesch, & Xu, 2008; Dholakia et al.,
2010). The e-fulfilment system of the retailer needs to meet the high order volume and
stringent customer service requirements (Cunningham, 1999). Speed and accuracy are the key
factors in e-fulfilment in order to attract and retain consumers that demand an extremely high
level of service (Tarn et al., 2003). The possibility to return products easily is generally
considered an essential element of customer service and satisfaction (AMR Research, 2000;
Heim & Sinha, 2001). Internet retailers cannot directly control the order process, therefore
order fulfilment is the weakest link in the e-commerce business (Yao, Kurata, &
Figure 2.1 Different time-windows (Boyer et al., 2006)


15
Mukhopadhyay, 2008), while consumers prefer reliability, on time delivery without mistake,
tracking the orders and receiving requested instructions (Davis-Sramek et al., 2008). Internet
retailers should take these preferences and the factors associated with shipping/delivery
operations in e-business into consideration to satisfy the end-customer (Yao et al., 2008). Jeff
Bezos, the founder and CEO of Amazon.com, stated that Amazon’s success resulted from its
excellent delivery operations, such as reliability and speed of fulfilment and reduction of
defect in any aspect (Hof, 2003). Consumers expect different delivery options like same day
delivery, next day delivery, time slot delivery, different delivery addresses, or picking up the
parcel from a pick-up point (Laseter et al., 2000). Internet retailers with traditional stores have
additional options of delivery service for their online sales channel. Physical store pick-up
points are a fairly common alternative in consumers’ e-fulfilment services. The presence of a
physical distribution structure could also be beneficial for return handling (Agatz,
Fleischmann, & Nunen, 2008). To compete with traditional retailers, many Internet retailers
have set up delivery centres all across the United States, speeding up the delivery of their e-
fulfilment process (Brynjolfsson et al., 2009).
According to Agatz et al. (2008), Internet retailers who consider offering time slot deliveries
to their consumers have to decide on:
• The service offer;
• Length of the time slots;
• Cut-off time of the slots;
• The actual time at which time slots are offered;
• The different zip codes served.
Other aspects that should be taken into account are the customer service considerations as
well as delivery cost considerations. Offering more time slots may increase customer service,
but it will likely increase the number of visits a delivery truck makes in the same zip code,
which will result in higher delivery costs (Agatz, Campbell, et al., 2008). Another factor that
can possibly increase the delivery cost is the population density in certain regions. As
mentioned in the first chapter, market penetration is important in certain regions for attaining
sufficient critical mass. If, for example, just one parcel needs to be collected or delivered in a
particular region, the cost will increase substantially (Gevaers et al., 2011). Offering longer
time slots in rural areas increases the routing flexibility of the vehicles (Agatz et al., 2013).
Retailers and logistics service providers could start to offer time slot delivery in a very
restricted geographical area in which consumers have a very high workload in terms of time


16
and, at the same time, the level of availability at home is low (Goebel et al., 2012). This area
could be used as a test market for the retailers and logistics service providers to see if this
service is feasible for them.
The online channel provides the consumers with all the information they need, thereby
reducing the buyers search costs and the advantage of a large range of products (Alba et al.,
1997; Kalakota & Whinston, 1977; Klein, 1998). The retailers’ website provides consumers
with information technology, IT-enabled search, a discovery and recommendation system,
lowering consumer cost of acquiring product information (Brynjolfsson, Hu, & Simester,
2011). Consumers expect to have the information whether the product they want to order is in
stock and ready to be shipped and being able to track the order up to their door step
(Thirumalai & Sinha, 2005; Xing et al., 2010). The site needs to be user friendly and be able
to communicate with highly sensitive customers, due to the availability of multiple vendors
(Tarn et al., 2003). The competitors of Internet retailers are not only in e-commerce but every
possible sales channel (Brynjolfsson et al., 2009), therefore Internet retailers should
investigate their online and offline geographic threats (Forman, Ghose, & Goldfarb, 2009).
The research of Brynjolfsson et al., (2009) showed that consumers with seven local stores
nearby had an internet demand for popular products which is 4.2% less than that of a
consumer with zero stores nearby.
For attended home delivery, the online retailer and the consumer need to agree on a delivery
time slot. Goebel et al. (2012) found that time slot delivery of parcels has a positive impact on
the delivery service towards consumers, making the service of retailers more attractive and
saving cost and effort for the logistics service providers. Table 2.1 shows an overview of e-
grocers offering time slot delivery services ranging from one hour to four hours.
Table 2.1 Delivery policies of e-grocers in Europe and US (Agatz et al., 2013)
Delivery area Delivery time
slot length
Timing Delivery fee
Albert.nl 65 % of Dutch
households

2 hour 8 am - 2 pm
4 pm - 9 pm
!4.95 - !8.95
Sansburys.co.uk 83 % of UK
postcodes

1 hour 10 am - 10 pm £5
Ocado.com 80 % of UK
households
1 hour 6 am - 11 pm £3 - £6
Tessco.com 96 % UK
households
2 hour 9 am - 11 pm £3.99 - £5.99


17
Peapod.com Chicago,
Washington, DC,
Boston, Baltimore

2 hour /
3.5 hour
6 am - 1 pm /
4 pm - 9.30 pm
$ 6.95 - $ 9.95
Albertsons.com Seattle, Portland,
San Francisco,
Los Angeles, San
Diego, Las Vegas
1.5 hour 10 am - 2.30 pm
3.30 pm - 9.30
pm

$9.95
Safeway.com Seattle, Portland,
San Francisco,
Los Angeles, San
Diego
2 hour /
4 hour
10 am - 3 pm /
4 pm - 9 pm
$ 9.95

The length of the time slot and its timing during the day are important aspects of the
consumers’ perceived quality of the service and at the same time these aspects impact the
delivery costs (Agatz, Fleischmann, et al., 2008). An empirical study done by Xing et al.
(2010) showed that consumers ranked the following factors as important for online shopping:
• Specific delivery date;
• Specific delivery time slot;
• Delivery on first date arranged;
• Prompt replacement.
Most of these variables are concentrated on the factor timelines, this is the time elapsed
between placing and receiving an order (Xing et al., 2010). Their results suggest that
consumers are very concerned with order conditions and returns of products ordered online.
Many traditional retailers use Internet as a complementary business channel while “pure
player” retailers only sell products via the Internet. Pure Internet players have better e-
fulfilment services quality than multi-channel retailers because pure players are more likely to
be equipped with the latest technology and provide better order tracking services (Xing et al.,
2010). Offering multiple complementary channels provides a greater and deeper mix of
customer service (Agatz, Fleischmann, et al., 2008). Fast moving products are suitable for a
physical store, whereas slow moving products are more suitable for an online channel
(Brynjolfsson et al., 2009). A multi-channel setting offers opportunities for integrating
inventories of different channels at a single location, but a single distribution model does not
suit all different sales channels (Tarn et al., 2003). Besides traditional fulfilment strategies
retailers should invest in comprehensive operational systems to have an effective and efficient
fulfilment process (Yao et al., 2008).


18
In this section the important preferences and factors for consumers regarding delivery service
are discussed with the findings from the available literature. To summarize the preference of
the consumers, retailers and logistics service providers need to fulfil the “seven R’s” in order
to meet customer satisfaction – a firm should deliver the right amount of the right product at
the right place at the right time in the right condition at the right price with the right
information (Davis-Sramek et al., 2008; Stock & Lambert, 2001) A summary of these
findings is given in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Overview of factors and preferences of consumers
Consumer Preferences Practical meaning Literature
Expecting competitive prices,
quality products, fastest delivery
for the online purchases /
broader assortments with
accurate availability and
timeliness delivery
Shopping online has possible
advantage that product could
be delivered to consumers.
Ability to shop any time every-
where, 24/7 access to broad
assortment

(Agatz et al., 2013)
(Krueger, 2000; Tarn et al.,
2003)
(Cachon et al., 2008; Dholakia
et al., 2010)
(Tarn et al., 2003).
Consumers prefer multiple
delivery options and possibility
to return products easily and
expect multiple complementary
channels providing a greater and
deeper mix of products
Same day delivery, next day
delivery, time slot delivery,
different delivery addresses, or
picking up the parcel from a
pick-up point.
(AMR Research, 2000; Heim &
Sinha, 2001)
(Laseter et al., 2000)
(Agatz, Fleischmann, et al.,
2008)
(Brynjolfsson et al., 2009)
Preference of narrow well-
balanced time slots over the day
and week with late cut-off
ordering times.
Time slots delivery ranges
from one to four hours;
Late cut-off time of the slots;
The actual time at which time
slots are offered;
The different zip codes served
(Agatz et al., 2013)
(Boyer & Hult, 2006)
(Agatz, Campbell, et al., 2008)
Preference of up-to-date
information and track and trace
of their products / IT-enabled
search, discovery and
recommendation system,
lowering consumer cost of
acquiring product information
Specific delivery date;
Specific delivery time slot;
Delivery on first date arranged;
Prompt replacement.

(Krueger, 2000; Tarn et al.,
2003)
(Davis-Sramek et al., 2008)
(Brynjolfsson et al., 2011)
(Thirumalai & Sinha, 2005;
Xing et al., 2010)


19
2. 2. CCnSuML8 CPA8AC1L8l S1l CS Anu Þ8CuuC1 1?ÞLS
The use of the Internet as a channel for the sale and distribution of goods from business to
consumers continues to grow(Dholakia et al., 2010). The reasons for this growth are twofold.
On the one hand, the number of consumers with access to Internet is increasing substantially,
while at the same time the percentage of the Internet users who purchase their products online
is growing too (Dholakia et al., 2010; Rao et al., 2011). Online consumers differ from each
other in terms of their online shopping behaviour and the expectations they have of the
fulfilment service. In this paragraph the different consumer characteristics are discussed first,
followed by the discussion of the different product types. The sub-question in this paragraph
is:
SQ2. According to literature, which consumer characteristics and product types are
relevant for time slot delivery service?
2. 2. 1. CCnSuML8 CPA8AC1L8l S1l CS
Successfully operating an attended home delivery service requires a careful optimization of
both sales and operations processes (Agatz, Campbell, et al., 2008). The availability of online
shopping has intensified the competition between retailers in various shopping channels
(Chiang & Dholakia, 2003). Consumers can choose whether to shop online or in physical
stores (Forman et al., 2009). The inclination to use a particular shopping channel often
depends on various factors such as consumer characteristics like age, gender, income and
education (Goolsbee, 2000). Therefore retailers should distinguish different consumer
characteristics and product types, in order to deliver the right service to the right consumer.
Besides the demographic variables, consumers’ demand may be influenced by whether a
consumer lives in an urban or rural area (Glaeser, Kolko, & Saiz, 2001).
As mentioned in the previous section consumers are gaining significant impact on company
processes, retailers are now tailoring their service processes to individual consumers’ needs
(Tarn et al., 2003). For example Peapod.com, allows consumers to customize their shopping
environment to make it more convenient for them to shop online (Degeratu et al., 2000).
Some retailers are improving their fulfilment services, according to different consumers
characteristics, by bundling their traditional store processes with their online stores, the so-
called brick-and-click retailers (Agatz et al., 2013). On one side many traditional retailers
have added an online sales channel to their portfolio. On the other side, many pure Internet
retailers are opening physical stores or are collaborating with traditional retailers (Ansari,
Mela, & Neslin, 2008).


20
A variety of online retailers use historical information about consumers’ online shopping
behaviour, in order to segment consumers into particular requirements and use this
information for segment-specific pricing and promotion (Agatz, Campbell, et al., 2008;
Agatz, Fleischmann, et al., 2008). Detailed transaction data provide a rich source for
analysing consumers’ response to different delivery options (Agatz et al., 2013). Depending
on the requested delivery time and location, some consumers may be more time- and cost
intensive than others (Agatz, Fleischmann, et al., 2008). The e-fulfilment delivery process
yields additional criteria for differentiation between different consumer characteristics.
Empirical studies have indicated that people with a higher education, in the modal or higher
income groups are more likely to buy online than the less well educated and below modal
income groups (Forsythe & Shi, 2003; Li, Kuo, & Rusell, 1999; Swinyard & Smith, 2003).
Research has indicated that people living in urbanized areas in the Netherlands are less likely
to search online but more likely to buy online than people in less urbanized areas (Farag,
Schwanen, Dijst, & Faber, 2007; Glaeser et al., 2001). It seems that having shops nearby
induces people to make more shopping trips, perhaps to explore a product in the traditional
store and buy the product online, because that is cheaper (Farag et al., 2007). Goebel et al.
(2012) state that consumers with a low level of availability at home, will perceive the time
slot delivery service as more attractive, meaning that consumers appreciate the service offered
by the retailer more than consumers with a higher level of availability in their households.

The value of time and the perception of a busy schedule are important factors in consumers’
decisions, there has been substantial research on time allocation and time valuation
(Bechwati, 2011). The theory of allocation of time suggests that time and money are
interchangeable currencies (Becker, 1965). This theory is further investigated among other
time allocations like leisure and home activities (Gronau, 1976). Consumers differ also in
their perception of time, one person could attach a higher value on time allocation than others
(Graham, 1981; Marmorstein, Grewal, & Fishe, 1992). Instead of spending time on home
activities, consumers can work or enjoy leisure activities (Holbrook & Lehmann, 1981).
Consumers’ perception and valuation of time is expected to influence the willingness to pay
for professional services (Bechwati, 2011). Retailers should make sure that the available time
slots cover the preferences of the different consumer characteristics, such as assuring
availability of evening slots in areas with many busy professionals who are not at home
during day hours or consumers with different lead-time preferences and a different attitude
towards willingness to pay (Agatz et al., 2013). Generally, it is assumed that consumers with a


21
high workload and less free time will perceive the transaction cost-savings of time slot
delivery as more attractive (Goebel et al., 2012).
This section suggests that detailed data about individual consumers provides a basis for
segment-specific pricing and promotion related to the time slot delivery service (Agatz,
Fleischmann, et al., 2008). Retailers could segment their consumers based on their individual
characteristics. This thesis will use these characteristics to see whether there is any significant
relation between these consumer characteristics and the willingness to pay for time slot
delivery service. Chapter 3 explains how these variables are measured and analysed. An
overview of the findings of this section is given in Table 2.3
Table 2.3 Overview of consumer characteristics according to literature
Consumer Characteristics Categories Literature
Consumers’ perceived value
of time
Low value of time
High value of time
(Agatz, Fleischmann, et al., 2008)
(Bechwati, 2011) (Becker, 1965)
(Graham, 1981; Marmorstein et
al., 1992).
Consumer demographics

Age classes
Education level
Gender
(Chiang & Dholakia, 2003)
(Forsythe & Shi, 2003; Li et al.,
1999; Swinyard & Smith, 2003).
Level of income Below modal
Modal
Above modal
(Goebel et al., 2012)
(Agatz et al., 2013)
(Becker, 1965)
Living area Urban area
Rural area
(Farag et al., 2007; Glaeser et al.,
2001)
Level of availability at home Low level of availability
High level of availability
(Goebel et al., 2012)


2. 2. 2. Þ8CuuC1 1?ÞLS
There are many methods of product classification discussed in the literature within the domain
of online retailing (Alba et al., 1997; Klein, 1998; Peterson, Balasubramanian, &
Bronnenberg, 1997). One of the possible classification methods is a search and experience
goods. Products are defined as search goods when full information for dominant product
attributes can be known prior to purchase (Chiang & Dholakia, 2003). A product is defined
as experience goods when full information on product attributes can only be known by direct
experience. For “search goods” such as books, the intention to shop online is higher than the
intention to shop for “experience goods” like perfume (Chiang & Dholakia, 2003). Another


22
way to classify products is on the basis of their demand pattern and match them with
physically efficient and market responsive supply chains (Fisher, 1997). The products could
also be classified based on the physical or non-physical attributes (e.g. duration of life cycle,
time window for delivery, volume and variability) based on the focused demand chain of
different product categories (Childerhouse, Aitken, & Towill, 2002; Randall & Ulrich, 2001).
Copeland’s product classification scheme is used in this research, which classifies products
into convenience goods, shopping goods and specialty goods (Copeland, 1978). The products
could be classified as “convenience goods” (e.g. groceries, home and office supplies), these
products are lowest in terms of effort and risk, consumers do not spend a considerable amount
of time and money on it (Thirumalai & Sinha, 2005). The second group is “shopping goods”
(e.g. clothing, shoes and other apparels), in the purchase of shopping goods consumers are
inclined to spend a significant amount of time and money in searching for it and evaluating
the products (Holton, 1958; Murphy & Enis, 1986). The third group is the “specialty goods”
(e.g. electronic products like a desktop), consumers spend the most time and money for these
products and perceive a significant level of risk (Holton, 1958; Thirumalai & Sinha, 2005).
While it is important for online retailers to have efficient and effective order fulfilment
processes for all products, it is more important for them to identify the products for which
consumers tend to have a higher order fulfilment expectation. Thirumalai and Sinha (2005),
found out that consumers’ expectation of order fulfilment vary across the three product
groups. Consumers’ expectations for the delivery process of specialty goods are higher than
they are for convenience or shopping goods (Thirumalai & Sinha, 2005). Their study
indicated that the order fulfilment processes of specialty goods are not meeting consumers’
expectation as good as the order fulfilment process for other product types. These indications
cause retailers to tailor their fulfilment processes to their different consumers’ expectations.
There are different product types for which, according to literature, consumers tend to have
different fulfilment expectations. Newton (2001) suggests that different product groups, as
discussed in this section, must be considered in the design of order fulfilment strategies.
Consumers place less value on home delivery and consequently willingness to pay for items
that are locally available (Newton, 2001). Copeland’s product classification scheme will be
used for further empirical research. The product groups are summarized in Table 2.4.



23
Table 2.4 Overview of product types according to literature

2. 3. l nCLn1l vLS lC8 1l ML SLC1 uLLl vL8? SLLLC1l Cn
As mentioned in the previous section, there are different kinds of consumers shopping online,
each of these consumers has his or her own preference regarding the delivery of their parcels
(Agatz, Campbell, et al., 2008). Knowing which incentives are important for each kind of
consumer is crucial information for an efficient fulfilment process. Therefore this section will
address the incentives that are mentioned in the literature regarding delivery services. These
incentives could be used with the revenue management concept to influence the consumers’
choices concerning time slot delivery service. The sub-question in this paragraph is:
SQ3. According to literature, which incentives can be used to influence consumers in
time slot selection?
2. 3. 1. uSL Cl l nCLn1l vLS Cn 1l ML SLC1 uLLl vL8? SL8vl CL
According to literature, the intention to shop online is influenced by a number of variables
including convenience, price, real-time information, product availability, timeliness and
reliability (Davis-Sramek et al., 2008; Heim & Sinha, 2001; Maltz, 1998; Peterson et al.,
Product types Categories Literature
Convenience goods Groceries,
Home and office supplies
(Thirumalai & Sinha, 2005)
Shopping goods Clothing
Shoes
Other apparel
(Holton, 1958; Murphy &
Enis, 1986)
Specialty goods


Electronic goods like
Laptops
(Holton, 1958; Thirumalai &
Sinha, 2005)
Search goods Full information on
product attributes can be
known prior to purchase
(like books)
(Chiang & Dholakia, 2003)
Experience goods Full information on
product attributes can only
be known by direct
experience (like perfumes)
(Chiang & Dholakia, 2003)
Physical or non-physical
product attributes
Duration of life cycle, time
window for delivery,
volume and variability
(Childerhouse et al., 2002;
Randall & Ulrich, 2001)



24
1997). Retailers should take these variables into account when they are fulfilling the
consumers’ order. E-fulfilment means delivering physical goods to consumers, which
involves picking, collecting, packing, dispatching, delivering and invoicing the online ordered
product to the consumers’ delivery expectation (Tarn et al., 2003) These expectations are
growing because consumers are becoming more demanding and they prefer different channels
at different moments and at different stages (Nunes & Cespedes, 2003). As mentioned before,
a product ordered online cannot be used by the consumer until it is delivered at the right
place, at the right time, in the right quantity and of course in the right condition (Xing et al.,
2010; Yao et al., 2008). The increase in online shopping brings a major challenge for the
retailers in terms of cost-efficient and effective processing of small transactions (Agatz,
Fleischmann, et al., 2008). Deploying the right incentives and knowing the important factors
concerning the fulfilment processes from the consumers’ perspective, will help the retailers
with this challenge. Besides the right incentives, Internet retailers should offer the right
product to the right consumer, keeping in mind that the competition between retail stores is
higher for popular products than for niche products (Brynjolfsson et al., 2009).
Internet provides the retailers with the unique opportunity to manage their service real time.
Campbell & Savelsbergh (2006) conducted a research on the use of incentives (discounts on
delivery fees) to influence the choice of time slots of consumers in order to reduce delivery
costs. They claim that if the consumers select better time slots, not only will the total distance
be less, but also a more efficient use of resources may increase the number of orders that can
be accepted, thus creating higher revenues. A summary of their findings is given below:
• The use of incentives can substantially reduce delivery costs thus enhancing profit;
• Incorporating intelligence (systems) into incentives enhance the performance;
• Incentives may substantially reduce the number of walkaways;
• It is sufficient to provide incentives for only a few delivery windows/time slots;
• The more time slots are considered for an incentive the more important it becomes to use
more sophisticated incentive schemes;
• It is easier to develop incentive schemes that encourage consumers to accept wider
delivery windows rather than those that encourage consumers to select specific time slots;

The size of demand is an important factor for time slot delivery, both in terms of the number
of orders as well as in the volume of orders. Internet sales volume is related to the population
density, the average income, the Internet penetration and other factors, which influence the


25
order size (Agatz, Campbell, et al., 2008). According to Agatz et al. (2008) retailers should
take the following factors under consideration when they consider giving consumers
incentives related to time slot selection:
• What types of incentives to use? Instead of reducing delivery fees, it is also possible to
offer free products or coupons;
• Indicating the environmental benefit may suffice to influence the consumers’ choice;
• Using only incentives or also using penalties to dissuade a consumer from ordering in
a specific time slot;
• In case incentives are in the form of a discount on delivery fees, will there be a single
level, like only 1 euro discount, or multiple levels of discount, 1, 2, or 3 euro discount;
• How much money made available for incentives for a given day or given time slot;
Uniform pricing typically results in an imbalanced demand over a day or even a week.
Differentiated pricing, such as peak-load demand and off-peak discounts, help counter the
imbalanced demand by smoothing it out over the available delivery moments, providing the
right price incentive can attract consumers to a particular time slot (Agatz et al., 2013).
According to a study of Xing et al. (2010) and Heim and Sinha (2001), important factors for
online e-fulfilment from the perspective of the consumer are:
• The promised delivery and time slot
• Order tracking and tracing
• Product availability
• Alternative offer / order completeness
• The return process offered by an online retailer
Internet retailers have taken major strides towards improving the profitability of their online
distribution channels (Agatz et al., 2013). Peapod.com (an American e-grocer) indicates that
even a small change in delivery fees can create a significant incentive for consumers to select
another time slot (Agatz, Campbell, et al., 2008). Albert.nl (a Dutch e-grocer) uses
differentiated delivery fees to balance the demand over the week as well as over the day. The
delivery fee ranges from ! 4,95 to ! 8,95 based on the popularity of the time slots.
Peapod.com offers discounts to encourage the selection of the longer 3.5-hour time slots when
appropriate according to the capacity of their resources. The most important online purchasing
criteria for consumers is the price, the market is getting more price-transparent and the


26
consumers are becoming more price-sensitive (Tarn et al., 2003; Xing et al., 2010). Price
incentives like a discount on delivery fees can be used to balance the demand over time.
Retailers could use price incentives, for example, for matching a delivery with a visit to a
nearby consumer, and for moving demand to temporarily underutilized delivery time slots
(Agatz et al., 2013).
2. 3. 2. l MÞ8CvL 1l ML SLC1 SLLLC1l Cn Wl 1P 8LvLnuL MAnACLMLn1
Revenue management has shown that companies can do much better than a one-size-fits-all
and first-come-first-serve strategy when selling scarce capacity to the heterogeneous market
(Agatz et al., 2013). Revenue management is a powerful way to manage the time slot delivery
concept. This methodology concentrates on the management of prices and inventory of scarce
goods in order to maximize profits (Agatz, Campbell, et al., 2008). The most successful
application market of revenue management is the airline industry. Seats are important in the
context of airlines as time slots are important in the context of delivery services (see
Table2.5). The cost of a seat is independent of who gets the seat, however, the cost of the time
slot depends on the location of consumers as well as the location of the other consumers
requiring a delivery in that time slot (Agatz, Campbell, et al., 2008). An important distinction
needs to be made between quantity-based and price-based solutions (Agatz, Campbell, et al.,
2008). The first decision concerns the number of time slots that are offered to the different
consumers. The second decision must focus on the delivery fee charged for the time slot
concerned. Dynamic pricing allows a differentiation not only between different delivery times
over the day, but also between different delivery lengths, like 2 hour or 4 hour time slots
(Agatz et al., 2013). The discount for delivery fees offered by the retailers will not only reflect
the willingness to pay of different consumers, but also gives the planning department more
flexibility for scheduling the deliveries (Agatz et al., 2013).
Table 2.5 Key characteristics of airline and e-fulfilment
Supply side: Airline E-fulfilment
Product Travel service Physical product + delivery
service
Capacity Number of seats: fixed,
perishable
Product inventory: flexible
Picking + delivery capacity:
inflexible, perishable
Cost Sunk at order intake Variable, interdependent
transportation costs
Booking Up to months in advance,
specific departure time
Days in advance, delivery time
slots


27
Demand side: Airline E-fulfilment
Revenues Fare Product margin + delivery fee
Transaction size Single seat Varying order size + driving time
Customer
heterogeneity
Willingness to pay, flexibility,
travel time
Willingness to pay, flexibility,
delivery time, order size, delivery
location
Response to stock out Lost, up-sell / down-sell
alternative flights
Lost, alternative delivery time,
offline store

One of the other ways to influence the consumers in selecting time slots is dynamic slotting
whereby the retailers manage their available time slots in real time during the ordering
process. In e-fulfilment it may be beneficial to reserve scarce capacity, (i.e. the most wanted
time slots), for the most profitable consumers (Agatz, Fleischmann, et al., 2008).
Online transaction and click-stream data provide a wealth of information on consumers’
behaviour and online retailing allows close interactions with the consumers, including rich
delivery negotiations. This allows retailers to have a tailored communication with their
consumers concerning the fulfilment of online ordered products (Agatz et al., 2013). The
Internet channels’ ability to allow consumers to acquire product information with greater
convenience and at lower costs leads to increased demand for niche products (Brynjolfsson et
al., 2011). Meeting the varied demands for order fulfilment processes across different product
types would require retailers to move towards a dynamic offering of delivery options of
corresponding dynamic pricing strategies (Thirumalai & Sinha, 2005). Although the time slot
delivery service could be offered at equal delivery fees, price differentiation usually leads to
higher revenue (Chiang & Dholakia, 2003) and lower working peaks (Hoseason, 2003).
Differentiated pricing, such as peak-load premium fees and off-peak discounts reduce the
fluctuation in demand (Agatz et al., 2013), see Figure 2.2.







Figure 2.2 Differentiated pricing effects on capacity requirements (Agatz,
Campbell, Fleischmann, Nunen, & Savelsbergh, 2013)


28
Revenue management has an immediate impact on service requirements and thus on costs
(Agatz, Fleischmann, et al., 2008), therefore online retailers need to decide on many aspects
of the offered delivery services, such as the length of delivery time slots and on corresponding
delivery fees (Chiang & Dholakia, 2003). To attract consumers who usually do not pay
shipping charges when purchasing from local stores, Internet retailers frequently offer free-
shipping discounts (Brynjolfsson et al., 2009). The Internet retailer serves a heterogeneous
market with a delivery capacity that is relatively inflexible in the short run, and the retailers
can change delivery fees and consumer access relatively easy (Agatz et al., 2013). Therefore
this concept divides the market in different demand preferences, like price sensitive
consumers and the level of flexibility of the consumers (see section 2.2). Each group has
his/her own preference regarding the expected service. This allows companies to analyse their
intended consumers and offer the right service to the right segment of consumers in order to
maximize their revenues. Being able to deliver a high service quality is an effective
differentiation strategy that Internet retailers can use to distinguish themselves from other
retailers (Xing et al., 2010). A summary of these findings is given in Table 2.6.

Table 2.6 Overview of the findings from literature
Practice Practical effects Literature
The number of slots offered to the
consumers could be managed in
real-time (Dynamic slotting);
Attractive time slots could
be offered to consumers
with higher WTP
(Agatz, Campbell, et al.,
2008)
(Agatz et al., 2013)
(Thirumalai & Sinha, 2005)
Offer free products, coupons and
shipping discount
Influence consumers in
time slot selection
(Agatz et al., 2008)
(Brynjolfsson et al., 2009)
Indicating environmental benefit
may suffice to influence the
consumers’ choice;
Sustainable consumers
could be influenced
(Agatz et al., 2008)

Using penalties to dissuade a
consumer from ordering in a
specific time slot;
Influence consumers in
time slot selection
(Agatz et al., 2008)
Differentiated pricing, such as
peak-load demand and off-peak
discounts (Dynamic pricing)
Balanced demand over the
week
(Agatz, Campbell, et al.,
2008)
(Agatz et al., 2013) (Xing et
al., 2010) (Thirumalai &
Sinha, 2005).
(Chiang & Dholakia, 2003)


29
2. 4. P?ÞC1PLSLS Anu 8LSLA8CP MCuLL
In this section the hypotheses will be formulated based on the conceptual framework and
literature findings presented in the previous section. The literature used in this section is
already discussed in previous sections, only a few important articles will be used to support
the hypotheses. Due to a significant rise of online retailing, one can assume that the overall
number of parcels ordered online will continue to increase rather than decrease (Goebel et al.,
2012). In order to be successful and survive in the online environment as a retailer, it is
important to know how consumers perceive a retailers home delivery service and how they
evaluate their online shopping experience (Davis-Sramek et al., 2008). The related sub-
question for this paragraph is:
SQ4. Which variables influence the willingness to pay of consumers for time slot
delivery service?
The inclination to use a particular service often depends on various factors such as consumer
demographic characteristics, as well as situational variables (Chiang & Dholakia, 2003).
Consumers’ demographics such as income, age, education and gender may influence the
demand (Goolsbee, 2000; Inman, Shankar, & Ferraro, 2004). In order to test whether these
characteristics also influence the willingness to pay for time slot delivery hypotheses 1a to 1c
are formulated.
H1a: Income of consumers has a positive effect on the valuation of the service.
H1b: Consumers’ education has a positive effect on the valuation of the service.
H1c: Consumers’ age has a positive effect on the valuation of the service.
Empirical studies have indicated that people with a higher education, in the modal or higher
income groups are more likely to buy online than the less well educated, and below modal
income groups (Forsythe & Shi, 2003; Li et al., 1999; Swinyard & Smith, 2003). Researchers
have argued that positive valuation and the perceived attractiveness of the service has an
influence on the willingness to pay for the service (Finkelman, 1993; Homburg, Koschate, &
Hoyer, 2005). Therefore this research will test whether consumers’ valuation of time slot
delivery mediated the consumers’ demographic characteristics.
H2: Consumers’ valuation of the service mediated the relations between income,
education, age, and willingness to pay for the service.


30
The theory of allocation of time suggests that time and money are interchangeable currencies
(Becker, 1965). Becker argues that consumers with a higher income are more likely to
substitute their time with expenditure for goods or services. For example, some households
where both adults are employed may have a higher value of time due the availability of
overtime work opportunities. Consumers differ also in their perception of time, one person
could attach a higher value on time allocation than another (Graham, 1981; Marmorstein et al.,
1992). Instead of spending time on home activities, consumers can work or enjoy leisure
activities (Holbrook & Lehmann, 1981). To save time these households are more likely to
shop online and they are also less price sensitive due to a higher income (Degeratu et al.,
2000). Goebel et al. (2012) state that consumers with a low level of availability will perceive
the time slot delivery service as more attractive, meaning that consumers appreciate the
service offered by the retailer more than consumers with a higher level of availability in their
households. The availability at home means the time consumers are at home and able to
receive their products. Therefore H3 and H4 are formulated to find out if the respondents
confirm the results shown by the literature.
H3: The level of availability to receive a parcel at home decreases the willingness to pay
for the service.
H4: Consumers’ value of time increases the willingness to pay for the service.
Successful order fulfilment remains an important indicator of whether a consumer would
place a subsequent order with the online retailer (Newton, 2001; Rao et al., 2011; Thirumalai
& Sinha, 2005). Therefore online retailers need to design their product and service portfolio.
This involves specifying both the product assortment and the offered delivery services, which
is an important determinant of consumer satisfaction (Boyer & Hult, 2006; Davis-Sramek et
al., 2008). Rao et al. (2011) investigated the relationship between delivery failures and
consumers’ future buying behaviour. The results provide empirical evidence that when
retailers fail to deliver upon order fulfilment promises, consumers react negatively. To find
out if there is any significant relation between negative delivery experience of the consumers
and the willingness to pay for time slot delivery service the following hypothesis is stated:
H5: Consumers’ negative delivery experience in the past has a moderating effect on
consumers’ valuation and willingness to pay for the service.


31
Two major reasons for consumers to shop online are increased convenience and greater
savings in terms of money and time (Jarvenpaa & Todd, 1997; Reichheld & Schefter, 2000).
According to Seider et al. (2005) convenience, the amount of effort and time a consumer
perceives to save in executing certain activities whilst shopping or consuming, is regarded as
an on-going and increasingly important trend in consumer behaviour. Chiang and Dholakia
(2003) found that convenience influences consumers to shop online, when consumers
perceive shopping offline as inconvenient, they are more likely to shop on the Internet
(Chiang & Dholakia, 2003; Hoseason, 2003). To find out whether these findings can be
maintained for this research, the following hypothesis is stated:
H6: Consumers shopping online because of convenience has a moderating effect on
consumers’ valuation and willingness to pay for the service.
Besides the demographic and socio-economic variables, consumers’ demand may be
influenced by whether a consumer lives in an urban or rural area (Glaeser et al., 2001).
Research has indicated that people living in urbanized areas in the Netherlands are less likely
to search online but more likely to buy online than people in less urbanized areas (Farag et al.,
2007; Glaeser et al., 2001). This research will show whether consumers living in rural areas
have a higher willingness to pay for time slot delivery service, than consumers living in urban
areas. The study of Goebel et al. (2012) assumes that some product groups are more time
critical than others. Newton (2001) discusses that consumers place less value on home
delivery and consequently willingness to pay for the delivery of convenience goods. On the
other hand, consumers have a relatively high expectation of order fulfilment for specialty
goods than for other product types (Thirumalai & Sinha, 2005). The expectations for shopping
goods are between the other two types. Therefore this research will use the different product
categories (book, jeans and laptop) to see whether there is any difference between
convenience goods, shopping goods, specialty goods and willingness to pay for the service of
the consumers. Next to these two control variables, this research will investigate whether the
variable gender influences the willingness to pay for time slot delivery.
Besides the hypotheses this research aims to understand which factors of time slot delivery
are important from the consumers’ perception, therefore a Conjoint Analysis is carried out.
This method is used to understand how consumers make series of trade-offs (Chiang &
Dholakia, 2003; Sekaran & Bougie, 2010). Revealing the relative importance of each time
slot attribute (e.g. price and time) this method is explained in more detail in chapter 3.


32
2. 3. 8LSLA8CP MCuLL
To summarize the aforementioned sections, Figure 2.3 shows the hypothesis in a research
model. This model will be used as a guideline to verify the findings in the literature and to
answer the fourth sub-question. The control variables are product groups, gender and the
living area of the consumers. All the hypotheses are presented in Table 2.7.

Income
Availability at
home
Age
Value of time
Convenience
Valuation of time
slot delivery
service
Negative
delivery
experience
Willingness to
pay for time
slot delivery
Dependent/Control Moderating Mediating Independent
Control variables
Product groups,
Gender, Living area
Education
H1c
H1b
H1a
H3
H4
H6
H5
H2

Table 2.7 Summary of the hypotheses
H1a Income of consumers has a positive effect on the valuation of the service.
H1b Consumers’ education has a positive effect on the valuation of the service.
H1c Consumers’ age has a positive effect on the valuation of the service.
H2 Consumers’ valuation of the service mediated the relations between income, education,
age, and willingness to pay for the service.
H3 The level of availability to receive a parcel at home decreases the willingness to pay for
the service.
H4 Consumers’ value of time increases the willingness to pay for the service.
H5 Consumers’ negative delivery experience in the past has a moderating effect on
consumers’ valuation and willingness to pay for the service.
H6 Consumers shopping online because of convenience has a moderating effect on
consumers’ valuation and willingness to pay for the service.
Figure 2.3. Research Model



33
3. ML1PCuCLCC?
In the previous chapter the first three sub-questions are answered and the hypotheses for
empirical research are formulated from the literature. This chapter will discuss the research
methodology for testing those hypotheses. In section 3.1, the data collection method will be
explained. In section 3.2 the measurements of the questionnaire will be discussed. Section 3.3
provides an overview of methods for the conjoint analysis and hypotheses analyses.
3. 1. Su8vL?
In this research the preference and consumer characteristics are investigated, therefore a
survey is best suited (Cooper & Schindler, 2003). Some of the literature used in this research
also uses the survey method for their empirical research (Bechwati, 2011; Chiang & Dholakia,
2003; Goebel et al., 2012; Kull et al., 2007). Arrow et al. (1993) recommend that a face-to-
face survey is best suited for willingness to pay studies. To see whether the questionnaire is
understandable for respondents an in-depth pre-test was conducted with 20 potential
respondents. The pre-test revealed that the respondents did understand the questions and were
able to answer the willingness to pay questions. After some feedback and results from the pre-
test, some minor revisions were made in the final questionnaire. The survey was conducted
under 300 respondents in the shopping streets of four rural and urban cities, taking into
account that consumers’ demand may be influenced by whether a consumer lives in an urban
or rural area (Glaeser et al., 2001). The local market structure can have an impact on
consumers’ Internet demand (Brynjolfsson et al., 2009). In order to collect the data over a
well-distributed area, the cities Rotterdam, Utrecht, Arnhem and Ede were selected for the
empirical research in the Netherlands in May 2013, a map with the origins of each respondent
is included in appendix E. Each respondent received a brief introduction to make sure that
they understood the nature of the survey. All 300 respondents completed the survey and the
data was used to test the research model presented in previous chapters.
3. 2. MLASu8LMLn1S
The questionnaire consists of four sections, each focusing on a specific topic of the research.
The four sections are introduced with a brief explanation of the concerning topic. The
questionnaire is constructed in collaboration with another student who uses the same data for
his research, see appendix A for the questionnaire used in this research. The first section of
the questionnaire focuses on the online shopping behaviour and the experience of respondents
with the fulfilment service. The subjects were asked to rank the given statements on a 5-point
scale of strongly disagree up to strongly agree. This method is adapted from the research of


34
Chiang and Dholakia (2003) with a Cronbach’s alpha reliability of 0.96. Respondents were
asked to indicate their online shopping frequency, choosing between weekly, once a month,
one to four times a year or never. Because all 300 respondents purchased online at least once
a year, all the data were used as 3 groups ordinal scale for further analysis. In order to
understand why respondents shop online, they were asked to indicate their most important
reason to shop online. They could choose between the following options: convenience,
product price or broad product assortment and availability. The data is labelled as nominal
scale. The second section is about self-pick-up of the products ordered online, another student
whose research is about the speed and location of the delivery uses this section.
The third section is focusing on the time slot delivery service. The data from this part of the
questionnaire will be used for the conjoint analysis and the willingness to pay for time slot
delivery service. The overall preference for time slot delivery service of the respondents is
measured also on a 5-point scale, which will be analysed using the conjoint method explained
in section 3.3.1. Measures for the questions were constructed in accordance with the existing
scales from Davis-Sramek et al. (2008), with a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of 0.95.
The fourth section of the questionnaire is twofold. The first part focused on consumers trust;
this part was incorporated at the request of the university. The second part concerns the
demographic questions like age, income and education. The respondents’ age was asked with
an open-ended question. Because the questionnaire was in the form of a face-to-face
interview, the gender of respondents was marked during the interview. The income of the
respondents was asked using three categories, below modal, modal (!33.000) and above
modal, the data is classified as ordinal variable type for further analysis. There are more
respondents with below average income than the other two categories. According to De
Vocht, (2009) if a particular group is clearly under- or overrepresented in the observed data,
the concerning groups need to be weighted for further analysis. Therefore the variable income
of the respondents is “weighted” so that the unbalance does not influence the results of the
analyses (Vocht, 2009). Respondents’ education was asked with an open-ended question and
was later classified into 5 ordinal classes.
3. 3. uA1A AnAL?Sl S
This section will discuss which methods will be used to test the analysis. The first section
focuses on the methods for measuring the overall preference of the respondents for time slot
delivery service, which will be used for the conjoint analysis. The second section discusses
the methods for analysing the hypotheses presented in the previous chapter.


35
3. 3. 1 CCn! Cl n1 AnAL?Sl S
In order to understand which factors of time slot delivery are important from the consumers’
point of view, a conjoint analysis is carried out. This method is used to understand how
consumers make series of trade-offs (Chiang & Dholakia, 2003; Sekaran & Bougie, 2010).
This method will provide the answer on how consumers develop their preference for a
combination of different choices available. The conjoint analysis consists of different
attributes (e.g. delivery fees, time slot length and moment of the day) each with different
levels, like for time sloth length, 2 hours, 4 hours or 8 hours. The different combinations of
the attributes together form the stimulus that is presented to the respondents.
Conjoint analysis attempts to determine the relative importance respondents attach to the
presented attribute levels. The respondents are presented with stimuli that consist of
combinations of attribute levels. They are asked to evaluate these stimuli in terms of their
desirability on a 5 point rating scale from 1 to 5 where a higher value means that the stimuli is
preferred by the respondents.
Conjoint analysis relies on respondents’ subjective evaluation. The stimuli are a combination
of attribute levels determined by the researcher, the underlying assumption for this method
being that the attribute levels such as price, time slot length and moment of the day (e.g.
daytime and evening), are evaluated by the respondents as a bundle of attributes (Malhotra &
Birks, 2007). This analysis aims to develop utility functions describing the utility respondents
attached to the levels of each attribute. For the composition of the stimuli the literature is used
to find out which preferences are important from the consumers’ perspective as described in
chapter 2.
The purposes of conjoint analysis are summed up below:
• Determining the relative importance of attributes in the consumer choice process. A
standard output from conjoint analysis consists of derived relative importance weights
for all the attributes used to construct the stimuli presented in an evaluation task. The
relative importance weights indicate which attributes are important in influencing the
consumers’ choice (Malhotra & Birks, 2007).
• Determining the composition of the most preferred time slot features (like price and
length). These features can be varied in terms of attribute levels and corresponding
utilities determined. The time slot features that yield the highest utility indicate the
composition of the most preferred time slot.


36
The method used during the survey with respondents is the “full profiles” method.
Respondents evaluate a complete profile of time slot features like length, price and the part of
the day that the order will be delivered. Each profile is described on a separate index card,
enclosed in appendix C. The difference between the attribute levels should vary significantly.
If the delivery fees are ! 4,50, !5,00 and !5,50, they will be a relatively unimportant attribute
for the respondents; the levels should be chosen carefully. On the other hand the chosen
attribute levels should be prevalent to the market. The general guideline is to compose the
attribute levels so that the ranges are somewhat greater than the market (Malhotra & Birks,
2007). The attributes and their related levels are presented in Table 3.5.



From the attribute levels presented in Table 3.5, the stimuli for the index cards were
constructed. Given the three attributes price, length and part of the day defined at respectively
5, 3 and 2 levels, a total of 5 x 3 x 2 = 30 profiles could be constructed. Because the time slot
lengths of 4 hours and 8 hours are not meaningful for the evening, they are omitted from the
profiles. The 20 profiles that will be used in the questionnaire are presented in appendix B.
Each respondent will be presented with 5 cards, meaning that 20 profiles will be divided into
4 different stacks. Thereby it is important that each stack contains all different attribute levels.
The first five cards form stack 1 (Card ID 1 until 5), the second group of five cards are stack
two and so on. In appendix C the 20 different profile cards that are presented to the
respondents during the questionnaire are enclosed with the results from the rating of the
respondents.
Respondents indicate their preference by making a trade-off between different combinations
of attributes. The total utility of each attribute is analysed with the following formula
(Malhotra & Birks, 2007), this model sums up the overall utility of each attribute and each
level:
! ! ! !"#$"#
!"
!!!
!
!!!

Where ! ! ! Overall utility or part-worth
!"# ! The utility associated with j level of i attribute
Table 3.5 Attribute levels

Attribute Levels
Delivery fee Free ! 4,00 ! 7.00 ! 10.00 ! 16.00
Time sloth length 2 hours 4 hours 8 hours
Part of the day Daytime Evening


37
!" = Number of levels
! = Number of attributes
!"# = 1 if j level of the i attribute is present and 0 otherwise
The analysis for the conjoint model above will be done with the CONJOINT command
available through syntax software, determining the relative importance of each attribute in the
consumers’ trade-off process and the composition of the most preferred time slot features (e.g.
time slot length, price and part of the day). These preferences will be presented in a utility
score called “part-worth”. The utility scores provide a quantitative measure of the preference
for each factor level, with a larger value corresponding to greater preference and willingness
to pay for any combination of factor levels (Sekaran & Bougie, 2010).
3. 3. 1. P?ÞC1PLSLS 1LS1l nC
This section of the research explains how the willingness to pay and valuation of respondents
with regards to time slot delivery service is measured and analysed. In order to reveal which
time slot length different consumers prefer for different products, a new variable “valuation of
time slot delivery service” is computed from the stimulus presented to the respondents. The
preference score for the index cards is used as indicator for this variable. Keeping the attribute
“price” constant and differentiating between the different time slot lengths will test the
hypotheses concerning valuation of time slot delivery service. The attribute level that is kept
constant is the price level of ! 4 euros. The time slot length will be differentiated between 2
hours (evening and daytime), 4 hours and 8 hours. The preference score for each of these
attribute combinations will indicate the willingness to stay home of different consumers for
different products. Each time slot length is evaluated by 75 respondents, which gives a total of
300 preference scores for valuation of time slot service hypotheses.
In order to measure the willingness to pay, the preference score for the cards is used as
indicator for this variable. Keeping the attributes “time slot length“ and ”day part” constant
and differentiating between the different price levels will test the hypotheses concerning
willingness to pay. The attribute levels that are kept constant are the 2-hour time slot and
daytime delivery moment. The price level will be differentiated between 4 euros, 7 euros, 10
euros and 16 euros. The preference score for each of these attribute combinations will indicate
the willingness to pay for the time slot delivery. Each price level is evaluated by 75
respondents, which gives a total of 300 preference scores for willingness to pay hypotheses.
These 300 scores are distributed among 3 different product groups as discussed in the
previous section.


38
Before starting with statistical analysis, the data will first be explored with the basic
descriptive analysis. The data will be examined for outliers, missing values. Some
assumptions need to be met before the hypotheses could be analysed, therefore the data will
be tested on the linearity, normality, skewness, kurtosis, mean and standard deviations. The
correlation between the datasets will be tested with Pearson’s R and Kendall’s tau statistics.
The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s test will be used to measure the adequacy
sampling, showing to what extend significant relations are found between the variables.
The main hypotheses will be analysed with the regression analysis. Therefore the following
equation is used: ! ! !! ! !!!! ! !
Where ! ! The dependent variable
!! ! The constant variable
!! = The independent variable
! = Error of variable
The mediation variables will be analysed by using the 3-step model of Baron & Kenny (1986).
1. ! should be significant ! ! !! ! !" !!
2. ! should be significant ! ! !! ! !" !!
3. If step 1 and 2 are support then test for ! ! ! !! ! !!! !!!! !!
- !! not significant means that ! is not a mediator
- !! not significant, !! significant means that ! is pure mediator
- !! significant, !! significant means that ! is partial mediator
From this three-step formula, the mediation relations between the variables could be
concluded. The moderation variables will be tested with a regression analysis, included with
an interaction between the independent variable and the moderating variable. Moderation
could be concluded when the interaction variable shows significant relation in the regression
analysis between the dependent and the independent variable. The equation for the
moderating variable looks as follows:
! ! !! ! !!!! ! !!!! ! !!!! ! !! ! !
Where ! ! The dependent variable
!! ! The moderating variable
!! = The interaction between !! !"# !!


39
4. 8LSuL1S
The previous chapter discussed the methodology of this research. This chapter will show the
obtained results. First an overview of the descriptive statistics followed by the validity and
reliability analyses. In the third section the data analysis and the results are presented.
4. 1. uLSC8l Þ1l vL S1A1l S1l CS
Table 4.1 shows the distribution of gender, age, income and education among the respondents
of this research. The income of the respondents has an unequal division; there are more
respondents with below modal income than the other two categories. Education is well
distributed among the respondents, there are enough respondents representing each category
(CBS, 2013). The number of respondents living in a rural and an urban area is well distributed
for this research (Table 4.1). The Dutch Institute of Statistics (CBS) defines urbanized areas
as areas with more than 1500 households per square kilometre. Appendix E shows the
distribution on the map of the Netherlands of all 300 respondents used in the research.













Table 4.1 Respondents’ characteristics

Frequency Percentage
Sex
Male
Female


145
155

48.3
51.7
Age
17-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55 >

Living Area
Urban
Rural


87
110
58
36
9


183
117

29
36.7
19.3
12
3


61
39
Income
Below Modal
Modal (! 33.000)
Above Modal
No Answer


140
93
50
17

46.7
31
16.7
5.6
Education
Secondary
Secondary (MBO)
Tertiary (HBO)
University
Otherwise

47
69
106
63
15

15.7
23
35.3
21
5


40
4. 2. vALl ul 1? Anu 8LLl A8l Ll 1?
Before hypothesis testing, the following basic reliability and validity tests were carried out,
including descriptive analysis, examination of errors and outliers, normality, skewness,
kurtosis, mean and standard deviations. In order to see whether some variables measure the
same construct, a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is carried out, the cut-off point is 0.6,
meaning that the value of PCA should account for at least 60 % of the variances (Malhotra &
Birks, 2007). The correlation between the datasets will be tested with Pearson’s R and
Kendall’s tau statistics, both of these measures use a ranking method to show the correlation
level, the output ranges from -1.0 to + 1.0, whereby 0 means no correlation (Malhotra &
Birks, 2007). The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s test will be used to measure the
adequacy sampling, showing to what extend significant relations are found between the
variables; the higher the KMO test, the stronger the relation between the variables (Field,
2013; Malhotra & Birks, 2007). The Bartlett’s test represents to what extend there is a
correlation between the variables and should be significant (Field, 2013).
The two variables that were used in the questionnaire, which should measure the same
construct, are presented below. The respondents receive the following two statements where
they could answer with: completely disagree, disagree, neutral, agree and completely agree.
• I have experienced late delivery of parcels;
• More than 1 in 10 parcels I received was damaged.
These two statements will be used to analyse the following hypothesis:
H5: Consumers’ negative delivery experience in the past has a moderating effect on
consumers’ valuation and willingness to pay for the service.
The answers need to be “recoded” into inverse relation (Vocht, 2009), which means that when
a respondent gives a 4, meaning he has experienced some delivery failures, this will be
recoded into a 2.
In order to see whether both of these statements measure the same underlying construct, a
Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is carried out. The results are displayed in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2. PCA

Component Matrix Component 1
Late delivery .782
Damaged delivery .782



41
The results show that there is a strong correlation of 0.782 between these two statements,
which exceed the cut-off point of 0.6. Therefore these two variables will be computed into a
new variable “consumers’ experiences” by summing up the scores of both variables.
Table 4.3 shows two correlation statistics, Pearson’s R and Kendall’s tau. These statistics
provide a correlation measure between the variables that will be used for the conjoint analysis
and for the hypotheses regarding the willingness to pay of the consumers. Both of these
correlations are significant which means that the data in this research is valid for further
analysis.
Table 4.3. Correlations
Correlations Value Sig.
Pearson’s R .982 .000
Kendall’s tau .860 .000

To measure the sampling adequacy of the data for the valuation of time slot delivery service
and willingness to pay variables, a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s test will be
carried out. This index compares the magnitudes of the observed correlation with the
magnitude of the partial correlation coefficient (Malhotra & Birks, 2007). Table 4.4 shows the
results of these tests.
Table 4.4. KMO and Bartlett’s
Correlations Sig.
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin .598
Bartlett’s test
of Sphericity
Approx. Chi-square
Sig.
407.549
.000

The Bartlett’s test is significant and the KMO value 0.598 is higher than the cut-off point 0.5.
These results concluded that the sampling adequacy is covered in this research. The results of
the basic descriptive analysis did not show any abnormality. Because most questions were
answered with 5-point scales the linearity assumption is met for further analysis.
4. 3. CCn! Cl n1 AnAL?Sl S
This section presents the results of the analysis related to consumers’ preferences and
valuation for time slot delivery service. The results of the conjoint analysis will be presented
first. Secondly the results of the hypotheses analyses are presented.


42
As explained in the previous chapter, the conjoint analysis aims to determine the relative
importance of the attributes presented to the respondents. The relative importance indicates
which attributes are important in influencing consumers’ time slot selection. The conjoint
analysis could also be used to determine important features (like price and length). The most
common method to interpret the results of the conjoint analysis is the part-worth estimate
given for each attribute. The higher the part worth, the more impact it has on the overall utility
and the respondents’ time slot selection. The time slot features that yield the highest utility
indicate the composition of the most preferred time slot.
First the model description and its relation to the scores are explained in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5. Model
Description

Attributes N of levels Relation to Scores
Price 5 Linear (less)
Length 3 Linear (less)
Day part 2 Linear

In the left columns the attributes used in the conjoint analysis are presented with the number
of levels used in the empirical research. The right side of the table shows the expected relation
between the attributes and the scores of the respondents. A “linear” label means that there is
an expected linear relation in the scores of the concerning attribute. The direction of the linear
relation can be indicated with the keyword “more” or “less”. More means that higher levels
of attributes are expected to be preferred. On the other hand, less means that lower levels of
attributes are expected to be preferred by the respondents. Specifying the direction of the
relationship does not affect the estimated utility of the attributes.
In Table 4.5 the expected relation between the attribute price and the preference of the
respondents is indicated as linear less, meaning that a higher delivery fee would lead to lower
scores for these attributes. The same is expected for time slot length. For the attribute “Day
part” consisting of levels “daytime” and “evening” no direction is indicated. This attribute
depends on the individual characteristics of the respondents and therefore it is difficult to
predict which preference respondents will have related to this attribute.
The conjoint analysis was carried out for all the attribute levels discussed in the previous
chapter. By using the additive model, all the individual utilities of the attributes are added up
to get the total value for each time slot feature. The utilities of each attribute level and their
standard error are displayed in Table 4.6.


43










These utility scores show which combinations of levels are most preferred. Higher utility
scores indicate a greater preference of the attribute levels by the respondents. As indicated in
the model description, there is an inverse relation between price and utility. A negative score
does not mean that the attribute is not attractive; it expresses the utility of each level
compared with other levels from the same attribute. It is possible that respondents prefer an
attribute level with a negative utility score. The results and the consequences of each attribute
level will be discussed in the next chapter.
Looking at the results of the attribute levels, the following combination (Figure 4.1) is
selected as most preferred by the respondents of this research, the rest of the index cards are
enclosed in appendix C.
Figure 4.1. Most preferred attribute combination
Table 4.6. Attribute Utilities
Attributes Levels Utility Std. Error
Price Free -.170 .022
EUR 4 -.680 .089
EUR 7 -1.191 .156
EUR 10 -1.701 .222
EUR 16 -2.722 .356
Slot Length 2 Hours -.257 .106
4 Hours -.514 .212
8 Hours -1.028 .425
Day part Daytime .144 .300
Evening .287 .601
Constant 4.247 .551


44
The relative importance of each attribute in time slot selection is presented in Table 4.7. These
importance scores are calculated by taking the utility range of the concerning attributes and
dividing it by the sum of the utilities of all attributes.
Table 4.7. Importance Score
Attributes Value
Price 68%
Length 22%
Day part 10%

The utility values percentage for each attribute provides a range of how important the attribute
is for the preference of the respondents. The results show that price (68%) has the highest
influence on overall preference for consumers’ time slot selection. The length of the time slot
is for 22 % important when respondents make their choice between time slots. The results
also show that the attribute “day part” has the least influence (10%) on the overall preference.
The possible reasons for these results will be discussed in the next chapter.
4. 4. P?ÞC1PLSLS AnAL?SLS
This section presents the results of the analysis of hypotheses formulated in chapter 2 related
to the WTP for time slot delivery service. First the results of the mediation hypothesis (H1a
up to H2) will be presented, followed by the results of hypothesis H3 and H4 and finally the
results of the moderating hypotheses H5 and H6 will be presented. To make sure no
multicollinearity occurs, during the multiple regression analysis, the Variances Inflation
Factor (VIF) is checked for all the analyses. No multicollinearity occurred, because the VIF
outcome for all the analysis was below the cut-off point 10 (Sekaran & Bougie, 2010).
The first four hypotheses for this section assume that there is a mediation effect between
consumers’ demographics income, education and age and dependent variable willingness to
pay for the service. The mediator is the variable “valuation of time slot delivery service”. The
mediation variables will be analysed by using the 3-step model of Baron & Kenny (1986).
The first regression will be between the individual independent variables and the mediation
variable, the second regression will be between the independent variable and the dependent
variable, when both of these regressions are significant, the third regression will be between
the independent variable, mediation variable and the dependent variable. The results are
shown in Table 4.8, with the beta coefficient, showing the positive or negative relation, and
the significant level, which indicates whether the hypothesis should be accepted or rejected.


45
Table 4.8. Mediation hypotheses on WTP
Hypotheses Proposed relation with the dependent
variable
Beta Significance Acceptance
H1a Income of consumers has a positive
effect on the valuation of the service.
0.175 0.000 Accepted
H1b Consumers’ education has a positive
effect on the valuation of the service.
0.106 0.002 Accepted
H1c Consumers’ age has a positive effect on
the valuation of the service.
0.054 0.225 Rejected
H2 Consumers’ valuation of the service
mediated the relations between income,
education, age, and willingness to pay
for the service.

0.395

0.000

Rejected
Accepted
Rejected

Hypothesis 1a showed a significantly positive relation between income and valuation of the
time slot service, but there was no significant relation in the second step, between income and
WTP variable. Therefore Hypothesis H1a is rejected. The results of the analysis show a full
mediation between the variable education and the WTP variable, the mediation with a positive
relation of 0.395 was highly significant (Sig. 0.000), and therefore H2a is accepted. There was
no relation between the variable consumers’ age and the mediation variable therefore H3a is
rejected.
The following hypothesis assumes a negative relation between the level of availability at
home to receive a parcel and the consumers’ willingness to pay for the service. The results of
the regression analysis are presented in Table 4.9.

There is a significant (Sig. 0.008) negative (-0.119) relation between the availability at home
and the willingness to pay variable. This means that a household where someone is available
Table 4.9. Hypotheses availability on WTP
Hypotheses Proposed relation with the dependent
variable
Beta Significance Acceptance
H3 The level of availability to receive a
parcel at home decreases the
willingness to pay for the service.
-0.119 0.008 Accepted


46
most of the time to receive a parcel delivered with a time slot delivery service is less willing
to pay for the additional delivery fee.
The following hypothesis assumes a positive relation between consumers’ value of time and
their willingness to pay for the service. The results of the regression analysis are presented in
Table 4.10.
The results in Table 4.10 show that consumers with a higher value of time are more inclined
to pay for time slot delivery service. The consumers’ value of time has a positive (0.111)
significant (Sig. 0.031) effect on the willingness to pay variable. Therefore hypothesis 4 is
accepted.
Before the moderation effects could be tested, the two moderating variables are multiplied
with the independent variable first, to create an interaction between the variables “valuation of
the service” and “Consumers’ experience” and between the variable “valuation of the service”
and the variable “Convenience”. The results are shown in Table 4.11.
Table 4.11. Moderating hypotheses on WTP
Hypotheses Proposed relation with the dependent
variable
Beta Significance Acceptance
H5 Consumers’ negative delivery
experience in the past has a moderating
effect on consumers’ valuation and
willingness to pay for the service.
0.014
(0.135)
0.026 Accepted
H6 Consumers shopping online because of
convenience has a moderating effect on
consumers’ valuation and willingness to
pay for the service.
-0.063 0.438 Rejected

From the output it can be concluded that there is a positive (Standardized Beta 0.135)
significant (Sig. 0.026) moderating effect between the independent variable valuation of the
service and the dependent variable willingness to pay for the service.
Table 4.10. Hypotheses VOT on WTP
Hypotheses Proposed relation with the dependent
variable
Beta Significance Acceptance
H4 Consumers’ value of time increases the
willingness to pay for the service.
0.111 0.031 Accepted


47
The three control variables were tested on the valuation of the service and the willingness to
pay for the service. The control variable that shows a significant difference between the
variables was “Product type”. Because the product group is a categorical variable, a Kruskal-
Wallis test is carried out to see the differences between the product types. Table 4.12 shows
the results of the test
Table 4.12. Kruskal-Wallis Test WTP
Product type N of levels Mean Rank
Book 102 170.45
Jeans 100 140.30
Laptop 98 140.15
Total 300




According to Table 4.13, there is a statistically significant (Sig. = .012) difference between
willingness to pay and different product types.
In order to see how the willingness to pay for time slot delivery service is distributed among
the different product types, Figure 4.2 shows the average preference score of the respondents
for each delivery fee used in the empirical research. These results will be discussed in the next
chapter.
Figure 4.2 Willingness to pay for different product types.

"#$
%#%
%#& %#&
"
%#'
%
'#(
%#)
'#)
%#'
'#*
+
+#&
'
'#&
%
%#&
"
"#&
$
$ ,-./0 1 ,-./0 '+ ,-./0 '( ,-./0
2//3 45670 869:/9
Table 4.13. Test Statistics WTP
Statistics
Chi-Square 8.764
df 2
Asymp. Sig. .012


48
4. 3. Auul 1l CnAL AnAL?SLS
Some additional analyses are carried out with the retrieved data from the empirical research.
The first analysis measures consumers’ preference for different shopping channels. The
second test presents the consumers’ preferred delivery option, followed by the analysis
between the relation of time slot length and the time slot price. These analyses show the trade-
off consumers make between different time slots and different delivery fees.
In chapter 2 the multi-channel retailers were introduced. In order to see which online retailers
are preferred most, respondents were asked to indicate which channel they trust more,
traditional stores with an online channel or retailers with only an online channel (pure-
players). The respondents could also answer neutral. The data from this question is classified
as nominal scale. The result of this question is presented in Table 4.14.






Table 4.14 shows that almost 65 % of the respondents have more trust in Internet channels
with a physical store and that 33 % of the respondents are neutral in their trust of the shopping
channel. These findings show that pure online retailers have a major challenge in winning the
trust of the consumers.
In order to see which delivery option respondents prefer, the respondents were asked to
indicate their preferred delivery option by rating the following two statements on a scale from
1 to 5 where a higher number means that respondents prefer one option above the other:
Imagine you order a product (book, jeans or laptop) today and you know that you are not at
home tomorrow, which of the following options do you prefer?
• Have the product delivered tomorrow, perhaps at the neighbours.
• Have the product delivered on a day indicated by you, later in the week.
Respondents could rate both options to indicate their preference. If respondents give both
options the same rating, it means that they do not prefer one option above the other. The value
that was given to the first option was subtracted from the value given to the second delivery
option.
Table 4.14. Trust in retailers
Highest trust Frequency Percentage
Multi-Channel 194 64.7
Neutral 98 32.7
Pure players 8 2.7
Total 300 100


49
This computation gives a value that lies between -4 and +4. If this value is positive it means
that the respondent finds the appointment delivery more attractive than the alternative
delivery option. The frequency of this value is presented in Table 4.15.











Table 4.15 shows that 65 % (195) of the respondents are willing to use the appointment
delivery rather than the delivery option at the neighbours (15%), when they know they are not
at home the next day. Table 4.16 shows that consumers’ preference for delivery options are
significantly (Sig. 0.000) different.
This research aims to provide answers to the valuation of delivery options by consumers for
different product groups. Therefore this questionnaire distinguishes between three product
groups, mentioned in chapter 2: convenience goods, shopping goods and specialty goods. In
this research respectively a book, jeans and a laptop was used, to see whether there is any
difference in valuation of the service between the different product groups. In the
questionnaire a picture and the price of the product were presented to the respondents. The
prices of the products were selected in such a way that there was a significant difference
between the products. The book was displayed at a price of ! 34.95 and the jeans and laptop
for ! 119, 95 and ! 550, - respectively. The results of the valuation are presented in Figure
4.3, a distinction was made between the different product types.
Table 4.15. Appointment delivery
Rating
delivery option
Frequency Percentage
-4 1 0.3
-3 2 0.7
-2 17 5.7
-1 26 8.7
0 59 19.7
1 56 18.7
2 68 22.7
3 54 18.0
4 17 5.7
Total 300 100

Table 4.16. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks
Statistics
Z Score -10.046
N 300
Asymp. Sig. .000


50

Figure 4.3. Respondents Preference scores for appointment delivery of different products.
The charts in Figure 4.3 indicate that the preference for appointment delivery is high
(preference score with 4 or 5) for all the product types. The vertical axis shows the number of
respondents and the horizontal axis shows the preference score of the respondents.
Respondents prefer appointment delivery above delivery at the neighbours, regardless of the
product type.
In order to see which preference consumers have regarding different time slot lengths and the
corresponding delivery fees, two tests are carried out between the time slot lengths (2 hours
and 4 hours) and the difference between the delivery fees. The same test is carried out
between “daypart” (daytime and evening) and the difference between the delivery fees. For
these tests two stimuli cards are compared with each other by carrying out a Wilcoxon Signed
Ranks test. Because 75 respondents evaluate each card, the total number of observations for
each test is 150 preference scores. Preference scores that are ties, meaning there was no
difference in respondents’ preferences, are not presented in the results. The most significant
difference between the preferred delivery options is presented in Table 4.17.
Table 4.17. Consumers’ trade-off based on different delivery fees
Difference in delivery fees 2 hours Vs. 4 hours Evening Vs. Daytime
! 0 74% 26% 64% 36%
! 3 15% 85 % 22% 78%
! 6 15% 85 % 16% 84%

All the results in Table 4.17 are significant, therefore it can be concluded that consumers will
choose the best delivery option when there is no price difference; when there is a price
difference they will choose the less optimal delivery option.
+
%+
$+
(+
' % " $ &
!""#
;</.5
+
%+
$+
(+
' % " $ &
%&'()
;</.5
+
%+
$+
(+
' % " $ &
*'+,"+
;</.5


51
3. ul SCuSSl Cn Anu CCnCLuSl Cn
In this chapter the results from previous chapters will be discussed; providing answers to the
sub-questions will conclude the thesis. Section 5.1 will discuss the conspicuous outcomes
from the empirical research as displayed in chapter 4 and explain why some outcomes are in
contradiction with the literature. Section 5.2 will conclude this thesis by answering the sub-
and research questions. The limitations of this research are explained in section 5.3, which
will be used as input for section 5.4 concerning future research.
3. 1. ul SCuSSl Cn
Through an in-depth literature survey a number of hypotheses are analysed in this research.
The conspicuous and interesting outcomes will be discussed in this section and linked to the
concerning literature. Some results need more explanation in order to understand why the
outcomes are different than expected or as stated in the literature.
This research distinguishes between different consumer characteristics. One of the
characteristics is the income of consumers. The results between the income and the valuation
of time slot delivery service are positively significant. Respondents with a higher income
indicated during the interview that they appreciate a service like time slot delivery of their
parcels. The results show that consumers with a higher income rate the three time slot lengths
(2 hours, 4 hours and 8 hours) higher than consumers with a lower income. These results
indicate that they prefer the time slot delivery service more than consumers with lower
income. Further analysis shows that the preference of all the income groups decreases when
the time slot length increases. The mediation relation between willingness to pay for the time
slot delivery and income is not significant. The reason for this could be that the index cards
were presented with a related product (book, jeans or laptop) and this factor could influence
the willingness to pay of the consumers. Another reason for these results could rely on the fact
that the income groups in this research were not balanced. Because of this unbalance, with a
confidence level of 90 % the hypothesis concerning the relation income and WTP could be
accepted.
Several surveys suggest that the online population is highly educated (Degeratu et al., 2000).
The results in this research show that consumers with a higher education have a higher
valuation for time slot delivery service and that there is a significant positive relation between
the higher educated consumers and the willingness to pay for the service. Consumer
characteristics age and gender did not have any effect on the time slot delivery service. There


52
were also no significant effects between consumers living in urban and rural areas.
Consumers’ delivery experience in the past has a positive moderating effect on the
willingness to pay for the time slot delivery service. Possible reason for this could be that
consumers with negative experience do not trust the normal delivery anymore.
According to Goebel et al. (2012), consumers with a high availability at home to receive their
parcel are less willing to pay for time slot delivery of parcels. This research investigated
whether these findings also apply to the Dutch population. The results of the analysis show
that consumers with a high availability at home have a significant negative relation with the
willingness to pay for the service.
Consumers differ also in their perception of time, one person could attach a higher value to
time allocation than another (Graham, 1981; Marmorstein et al., 1992). This research
analysed the relation between consumers’ value of time and their willingness to pay for the
service. The results show a significant positive relation between consumers with a higher
value of time and their willingness to pay for the service. These findings confirm the findings
of Goebel et al. (2012).
As explained in the first chapter it is valuable to understand which preference consumers have
with regard to the attributes (e.g. price and length) of time slot delivery service. Therefore a
conjoint analysis is carried out to reveal these preferences. The results match the expectations
for the different attribute levels. For the attribute price, the utility value decreases when the
price for delivery increases. This is the same for the length of the time slot. For the attribute
delivery moment, respondents prefer evening delivery over daytime delivery. So far all the
results show nothing unexpected. But the results of the relative importance (Table 4.6, page
43) show that the attribute price is important for 68 %, when respondents choose between
different time slot options. The length of the time slot is only important for 22 %. Therefore
this section will focus more on the attribute price. Table 5.1 gives an overview of average
preference scores of consumers for different price and time slot length combinations.
In order to know if there is any relation between the length of the time slot and the willingness
to pay for the delivery service, different time slot lengths were presented to the respondents.
The time slot lengths were composed in such a way that there was a clear difference between
the time slots (2 hours, 4 hours and 8 hours). Respondents were asked to indicate their
preference score for each possible combination of time sloth length and price level. The
results of the empirical research match the expectations that the willingness to pay will


53
decrease when the time slot length increases, see Table 5.1. During the interview respondents
remarked that they prefer narrow time slots through the day. Respondents indicate that when a
retailer offers time slot delivery service (with or without extra delivery fee) the retailer also
needs to make sure that these delivery options contain narrow time slots of 1 or 2 hours. Some
respondents even expect a notification by phone message from the logistics service provider,
in order to know the exact delivery moment within the time slot of 2 hours. So the results not
only indicate that respondents’ willingness to pay decrease with wider time slots, but there is
still a huge gap between the expectation of the consumers and the performance of retailers and
logistics service providers.

Table 5.1 shows that when price or length of the time slot increases, the preference of
consumers decrease. During the interviews with the respondents one important observation
was that when respondents are provided with a delivery option to rate and the delivery
charges are free, those cards were always rated high, regardless of the other attributes. This is
important for retailers to take into account, when they establish their pricing strategy. Because
almost all the respondents rated the free delivery option high, it was excluded from the
willingness to pay analysis, in order to prevent outliers and biased outcomes.
Goebel et al. (2012) indicate in their study that it is relevant to understand for which product
types consumers are more inclined to invest time and money. Therefore it is important to see
if there is any difference in willingness to pay between the different product groups. In this
research respondents were presented with three products: a book (convenience product), jeans
(shopping product), and a laptop (specialty product). In the questionnaire a picture and the
price of the product were presented to the respondents. The prices of the products were
selected in such a way that there was a significant difference between the products. The book
was displayed at a price of ! 34.95 and the jeans and laptop for ! 119, 95 and ! 550,
respectively. The results of this research show that there is a significant difference in
willingness to pay for different products (Figure 5.1). Contrary to the expectation, the
Table 5.1. Preference score between price and different time slot lengths
Time slot Length/Price Free 4 EUR 7 EUR 10 EUR 16 EUR Total
2 Hours Evening 4.8 3.5 2.6 2.4 1.7 15
2 Hours Daytime 4.7 3.1 2.1 2.2 2.0 14.1
4 Hours Daytime 4.4 3.1 2.5 1.8 1.3 13.1
8 Hours Daytime 3.4 2.2 1.8 1.5 1.3 10.2
Total 17.3 11.9 9 7.9 6.3 104.8


54
willingness to pay for a book is higher than for the other two products. Respondents give the
following reason for this: “when I order an expensive product online, I expect the delivery
charges to be free”. Because some online retailers offer free delivery above a certain price
level, respondents are not willing to pay delivery charges for expensive products like jeans
and laptops.

Figure 5.1 Preference of the respondents for time slot delivery presented for each product.
Figure 5.1 shows which price level is most preferred for each product group, keeping the
other attributes constant. The charts only show the preferences of respondents who rate the
price level with a 4 or a 5 score. The complete overviews of all the rating scores are included
in appendix D. The charts confirm the statistical results of the previous chapter. As discussed
in the previous section, consumers are more willing to pay for cheaper products than for
expensive products.

3. 2. CCnCLuSl Cn
This research aims to give insight in a consumers’ point of view concerning time slot delivery
service. Retailers could use this insight to influence consumers in their time slot selection.
Better time slot selection will lead to an efficient delivery process with more successful home
deliveries. The important factors for this delivery service were highlighted in the literature
survey and the preferences concerning these factors were discussed for the consumers. In
order to understand how consumers can be influenced in their time slot selection, it is
important to know how consumers value the time slot delivery service in terms of spending
time and spending money for the service. Therefore the following research question was
formulated for this thesis:
"#$
%#%
%#& %#&
!""#
2//3
"
%#' %
'#(
%&'()
45670
%#)
'#)
%#'
'#*
*'+,"+
869:/9


55
RQ How do different consumers value time slot delivery service for various
product groups purchased online?
To answer this research question, a number of sub-questions were formulated. These
questions will serve as a guide to conclude this research. The first sub-question reveals the
important preferences of consumers with regard to time slot delivery from the literature.
SQ1. According to literature, which preferences regarding time slot delivery service
are important for consumers?
For consumers it is an important trade-off how much they are willing to pay and how much
time and effort they are willing to spend in receiving their products ordered online. This
trade-off is used as a guideline for this research. Consumers shopping online prefer
convenience, competitive prices, real-time information, product availability, timeliness
delivery and high reliability. Regarding time slot delivery, consumers prefer a narrow time
slot with up-to-date delivery information, with low delivery fees. Speed and accuracy are the
key factors in e-fulfilment in order to attract and retain consumers that demand an extremely
high level of service.
The second sub-question provides an overview of possible consumer characteristics and
indicates which product types are mentioned in literature with regard to online shopping.
SQ2. According to literature, which consumer characteristics and product types are
relevant for time slot delivery service?
According to literature important consumers characteristics are, demographics (age, education
or gender) and level of income, consumers’ value of time, level of availability at home and
the living area of the consumers. Retailers can use this information to deliver the right service
to the right customer and so increase their revenues. Copeland’s’ product classification
scheme is used to distinguish between different products. The products can be classified as
convenience goods like a book or as shopping goods like jeans or specialty goods like a
laptop. This classification scheme is used for further empirical research in this thesis.
SQ3. According to literature, which incentives can be used to influence consumers in
time slot selection?
The third sub-question explains how retailers can influence their consumers by applying the
revenue management concept. Important incentives for influencing the consumers mentioned


56
in the literature are differentiating between different prices (for delivery fees as well as for
product price) and differentiating between the number of delivery time slots offered to the
consumers. The online shopping environment gives the online retailers a unique opportunity
to influence their consumers real time (like delivery discount or free products). This
opportunity can increase dynamic pricing and slotting. The prices and possible delivery
options could be adjusted real time during the ordering process based on the different
consumer characteristics and their online shopping behaviour.
The empirical research of this study gave answers to the fourth sub-question, by indicating
how different consumers value time slot delivery service for different product groups.
SQ4. Which variables influence the willingness to pay of consumers for time slot
delivery service?
The findings from the first three theoretical sub-questions were used as input for the empirical
research. A conjoint analysis is used to reveal the consumers’ preference for different attribute
levels of time slot delivery service. The important findings are that price and time slot length
are negatively related to the valuation of consumers. This means that consumers’ valuation
decreases when the price or length of the time slots increases. The other important finding is
that the attribute price is important for 68 % when respondents choose between different time
slot options, whereas the relative importance of the time slot length is only 22 %. Online
retailers should take these results in consideration when they establish their time slot delivery
features.
This research shows that there is a significant difference in valuation of time slot delivery
service between consumer segments and product groups. A higher income of the respondents
has influence on the valuation of time slot delivery, whereas higher education of the
respondents has a positive effect on valuation and willingness to pay for time slot delivery
service. Product types and consumer characteristics are important criteria for time slot
delivery service. The willingness to pay of consumers is higher for cheaper products than for
expensive products. Consumers have a different perception of time allocation and value of
time, this research revealed that consumers with higher value of time have a higher
willingness to pay for the service. Consumers’ availability at home decreases the willingness
to pay for time slot delivery. These results confirm the findings from the literature review.



57
3. 3. Ll Ml 1A1l Cn
Although 300 respondents were interviewed for this research using 20 attribute cards to reveal
their preferences, approximately 75 respondents evaluated each card. This is because the
cards were divided in 4 stacks of 5 cards each. Because of this restriction some outcomes of
the research are not statistically significant. This could be solved in future research by giving
the respondents more cards to evaluate. There was also some unbalance in the consumers
characteristics, this unbalance has influenced some outcomes of the statistical analysis. This
limitation could be solved by random sample selection or by interviewing more respondents,
this will reduce the unbalance in respondents’ characteristics like income classes. Weighing
the variable income reduced the influence of this unbalance.
3. 4. lu1u8L 8LSLA8CP
Future research in this field could be based on the cost and benefit analysis and measuring the
advantages and disadvantages of time slot delivery. This research could be done from both
consumers’ and retailers’ point of view. It is relevant to see which operational costs are
involved for the retailers and which benefits appear from this delivery option. This analysis
could be performed in terms of monetary value and non-monetary value.
Other interesting future research could be done on the difference between pure online retailers
and multichannel retailers. This research just mentioned some differences between these two
retailers but more research in this field could reveal how different online retailers could
implement a time slot delivery service into their fulfilment services. This research revealed
that respondents’ trust and preference for multichannel retailers are higher than for pure
online retailers. Future research could answer which gap pure online retailers need to fill in
order to win the preference of the consumers.



58
6. 8LlL8LnCLS
AgaLz, Campbell, llelschmann, nunen, v., & Savelsbergh. (2013). 8evenue managemenL opporLunlLles for
lnLerneL reLallers. !"#$%&' ") *+,+%#+ - .$/0/%1 2&%&1+3+%45 67(2), 128-138.
AgaLz, Campbell, llelschmann, & Savels. (2008). Challenges and opporLunlLles ln aLLended home dellvery. 89+
:+9/0'+ *"#4/%1 .$";'+3< =&4+>4 ?@,&%0+> &%@ A+B C9&''+%1+>, 379-396.
AgaLz, Campbell, llelschmann, & Savelsbergh. (2011). 1lme sloL managemenL ln aLLended home dellvery.
8$&%>D"$4&4/"% E0/+%0+5 FG(3), 433-449.
AgaLz, llelschmann, & nunen, v. (2008). L-fulfllmenL and mulLl-channel dlsLrlbuLlon - A revlew. H#$"D+&%
!"#$%&' ") ID+$&4/"%&' *+>+&$095 6JK(2), 339-336. dol:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.04.024
Alba, Lynch, WelLz, !anlszewskl, LuLz, Sawyer, & Wood. (1997). lnLeracLlve home shopplng: consumer, reLaller,
and manufacLurer lncenLlves Lo parLlclpaLe ln elecLronlc markeLplaces. 89+ !"#$%&' ") 2&$L+4/%1, 38-
33.
AM8 8esearch. (2000). lnLerneL 8eLallers Are SLlll L-lulfllmenL AmaLeurs: 1he AM8 8esearch Pollday Survey
8eLrleved 2 sepLember, 2013, from
http://www.thestandard.com/research/store/report_display/0,1202,818,00.html
Ansarl, Mela, & neslln. (2008). CusLomer channel mlgraLlon. !"#$%&' ") 2&$L+4/%1 *+>+&$095 FG(1), 60-76.
8echwaLl. (2011). Wllllngness Lo pay for professlonal servlces. !"#$%&' ") .$"@#04 - M$&%@ 2&%&1+3+%45 7N(1),
73-83.
8ecker. (1963). A 1heory of Lhe AllocaLlon of 1lme. 89+ +0"%"3/0 O"#$%&'5 KG(299), 493-317.
8oyer, & PulL. (2003). LxLendlng Lhe supply chaln: lnLegraLlng operaLlons and markeLlng ln Lhe onllne grocery
lndusLry. !"#$%&' ") ID+$&4/"%> 2&%&1+3+%45 7P(6), 642-661.
8oyer, & PulL. (2006). CusLomer behavloral lnLenLlons for onllne purchases: An examlnaLlon of fulfllmenL
meLhod and cusLomer experlence level. !"#$%&' ") ID+$&4/"%> 2&%&1+3+%45 7F(2), 124-147.
8ryn[olfsson, Pu, & 8ahman. (2009). 8aLLle of Lhe reLall channels: Pow producL selecLlon and geography drlve
cross-channel compeLlLlon. 2&%&1+3+%4 E0/+%0+5 GG(11), 1733-1763.
8ryn[olfsson, Pu, & SlmesLer. (2011). Coodbye pareLo prlnclple, hello long Lall: 1he effecL of search cosLs on Lhe
concenLraLlon of producL sales. 2&%&1+3+%4 E0/+%0+5 GK(8), 1373-1386.
Cachon, 1erwlesch, & xu. (2008). Cn Lhe effecLs of consumer search and flrm enLry ln a mulLlproducL
compeLlLlve markeL. 2&$L+4/%1 E0/+%0+5 7K(3), 461-473.
Campbell, & Savelsbergh. (2006). lncenLlve schemes for aLLended home dellvery servlces. 8$&%>D"$4&4/"%
E0/+%0+5 FN(3), 327-341.
C8S. (2012). CmzeL deLallhandel groelL marglnaal. (Þ812-037). 8eLrleved 08 lebruary 2012 from
http://www.cbs.nl
C8S. (2013). lC1, kennls en economle 2013 (pp. 239). uen Paag/Peerlen.
Chlang, & uholakla. (2003). lacLors drlvlng consumer lnLenLlon Lo shop onllne: an emplrlcal lnvesLlgaLlon.
!"#$%&' ") C"%>#3+$ .>Q09"'"1Q5 6P(1), 177-183.


59
Chllderhouse, AlLken, & 1owlll. (2002). Analysls and deslgn of focused demand chalns. !"#$%&' ") ID+$&4/"%>
2&%&1+3+%45 7N(6), 673-689.
Cooper, & Schlndler. (2003). 8uslness research meLhods.
Copeland. (1978). .$/%0/D'+> ") 3+$09&%@/>/%1: Arno Þress.
Cunnlngham. (1999). lrom Pere Lo e-1ernlLy. ?%%#&' *+,/+B ") C"33#%/0&4/"%>, 27.
uavls-Sramek, MenLzer, & SLank. (2008). CreaLlng consumer durable reLaller cusLomer loyalLy Lhrough order
fulfllmenL servlce operaLlons. !"#$%&' ") ID+$&4/"%> 2&%&1+3+%45 7R(6), 781-797.
uegeraLu, 8angaswamy, & Wu. (2000). Consumer cholce behavlor ln onllne and LradlLlonal supermarkeLs: 1he
effecLs of brand name, prlce, and oLher search aLLrlbuLes. S%4+$%&4/"%&' !"#$%&' ") *+>+&$09 /%
2&$L+4/%15 6K(1), 33-78.
uholakla, kahn, 8eeves, 8lndflelsch, SLewarL, & 1aylor. (2010). Consumer behavlor ln a mulLlchannel,
mulLlmedla reLalllng envlronmenL. !"#$%&' ") S%4+$&04/,+ 2&$L+4/%15 7F(2), 86-93.
Lhmke. (2012). ALLended Pome uellvery S%4+1$&4/"% ") S%)"$3&4/"% &%@ ID4/3/T&4/"% 2"@+'> )"$ *"#4/%1 /% C/4Q
="1/>4/0> (pp. 23-33).
Lhmke, & MaLLfeld. (2012). vehlcle 8ouLlng for ALLended Pome uellvery ln ClLy LoglsLlcs. .$"0+@/&UE"0/&' &%@
M+9&,/"$&' E0/+%0+>5 PV, 622-632.
larag, Schwanen, ul[sL, & laber. (2007). Shopplng onllne and/or ln-sLore? A sLrucLural equaLlon model of Lhe
relaLlonshlps beLween e-shopplng and ln-sLore shopplng. 8$&%>D"$4&4/"% *+>+&$09 .&$4 ?< ."'/0Q &%@
.$&04/0+5 F6(2), 123-141.
lleld. (2013). W/>0",+$/%1 >4&4/>4/0> #>/%1 SM2 E.EE >4&4/>4/0>: Sage.
llnkelman. (1993). Crosslng Lhe 'Zone of lndlfference,'. 2&$L+4/%1 2&%&1+3+%45 7(3), 22-32.
llsher. (1997). WhaL ls Lhe rlghL supply chaln for your producL? X&$,&$@ ;#>/%+>> $+,/+B5 KG, 103-117.
lorman, Chose, & Coldfarb. (2009). CompeLlLlon beLween local and elecLronlc markeLs: Pow Lhe beneflL of
buylng onllne depends on where you llve. 2&%&1+3+%4 E0/+%0+5 GG(1), 47-37.
lorsyLhe, & Shl. (2003). Consumer paLronage and rlsk percepLlons ln lnLerneL shopplng. !"#$%&' ") ;#>/%+>>
$+>+&$095 GR(11), 867-873.
CCl. (2008). luLure Supply Chaln 2016 E+$,/%1 C"%>#3+$> /% & E#>4&/%&;'+ Y&Q5 Z'";&' C"33+$0+ S%/4/&4/,+.
Cevaers, voorde, v. d., & vanelslander. (2011). CharacLerlsLlcs and Lypology of lasL-mlle loglsLlcs from an
lnnovaLlon perspecLlve ln an urban conLexL C/4Q W/>4$/;#4/"% &%@ [$;&% \$+/194 8$&%>D"$4< 2#'4/D'+
.+$>D+04/,+> H@B&$@ H'1&$ .#;'/>9/%1 (pp. 36-71).
Claeser, kolko, & Salz. (2001). Consumer clLy. !"#$%&' ") +0"%"3/0 1+"1$&D9Q5 6(1), 27-30.
Coebel, Moeller, & Þlbernlk. (2012). Þaylng for convenlence: ALLracLlveness and revenue poLenLlal of Llme-
based dellvery servlces. S%4+$%&4/"%&' !"#$%&' ") .9Q>/0&' W/>4$/;#4/"% - ="1/>4/0> 2&%&1+3+%45 F7(6),
384-606.
Coolsbee. (2000). ln a world wlLhouL borders: 1he lmpacL of Laxes on lnLerneL commerce. 89+ ]#&$4+$'Q !"#$%&'
") H0"%"3/0>5 66G(2), 361-376.
Craham. (1981). 1he role of percepLlon of Llme ln consumer research. !"#$%&' ") 0"%>#3+$ $+>+&$09, 333-342.


60
Cronau. (1976). Lelsure, home producLlon and work--Lhe Lheory of Lhe allocaLlon of Llme revlslLed: naLlonal
8ureau of Lconomlc 8esearch Cambrldge, Mass., uSA.
Pelm, & Slnha. (2001). CperaLlonal drlvers of cusLomer loyalLy ln elecLronlc reLalllng: An emplrlcal analysls of
elecLronlc food reLallers. 2&%#)&04#$/%1 - E+$,/0+ ID+$&4/"%> 2&%&1+3+%45 P(3), 264-271.
Pof. (2003). !eff 8ezos: llxaLed on Lhe CusLomer. M#>/%+>> Y++L I%'/%+ 8eLrleved 9 sepLember, 2013, from
http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2003-09-28/online-extra-jeff-bezos-fixated-on-
the-customer
Polbrook, & Lehmann. (1981). AllocaLlng dlscreLlonary Llme: ComplemenLarlLy among acLlvlLles. !"#$%&' ")
0"%>#3+$ $+>+&$09, 393-406.
PolLon. (1938). 1he dlsLlncLlon beLween convenlence goods, shopplng goods, and speclalLy goods. 89+ !"#$%&'
") 2&$L+4/%1, 33-36.
Pomburg, koschaLe, & Poyer. (2003). uo saLlsfled cusLomers really pay more? A sLudy of Lhe relaLlonshlp
beLween cusLomer saLlsfacLlon and wllllngness Lo pay. !"#$%&' ") 2&$L+4/%1, 84-96.
Poseason. (2003). Þrlclng: Maklng proflLable declslons. !"#$%&' ") *+,+%#+ &%@ .$/0/%1 2&%&1+3+%45 7(2), 173-
177.
lnman, Shankar, & lerraro. (2004). 1he roles of channel-caLegory assoclaLlons and geodemographlcs ln channel
paLronage. !"#$%&' ") 2&$L+4/%1, 31-71.
!arvenpaa, & 1odd. (1997). ls Lhere a fuLure for reLalllng on Lhe lnLerneL. H'+04$"%/0 3&$L+4/%1 &%@ 49+
0"%>#3+$, 139-134.
kahneman, lredrlckson, Schrelber, & 8edelmeler. (1993). When more paln ls preferred Lo less: Addlng a beLLer
end. .>Q09"'"1/0&' E0/+%0+5 F(6), 401-403.
kalakoLa, & WhlnsLon. (1977). LlecLronlc Commerce-a Manager's Culde. *+&@/%15 2?< ?@@/>/"%UY+>'+Q.
kleln. (1998). LvaluaLlng Lhe poLenLlal of lnLeracLlve medla Lhrough a new lens: search versus experlence goods.
!"#$%&' ") ;#>/%+>> $+>+&$095 F6(3), 193-203.
krueger. (2000). L-fulfllmenL soluLlons. 2&%#)&04#$/%1 EQ>4+3>5 6J(12), 60-64.
kull, 8oyer, & CalanLone. (2007). LasL-mlle supply chaln efflclency: an analysls of learnlng curves ln onllne
orderlng. S%4+$%&4/"%&' !"#$%&' ") ID+$&4/"%> - .$"@#04/"% 2&%&1+3+%45 7K(4), 409-434.
LaseLer, PousLon, Chung, 8yrne, 1urner, & uevendran. (2000). 1he LasL Mlle Lo nowhere: llaws & lallacles ln
lnLerneL Pome-uellvery Schemes. E4$&4+1Q &%@ M#>/%+>>, 40-49.
Ll, kuo, & 8usell. (1999). 1he lmpacL of percelved channel uLlllLles, shopplng orlenLaLlons, and demographlcs on
Lhe consumer's onllne buylng behavlor. !"#$%&' ") C"3D#4+$‐2+@/&4+@ C"33#%/0&4/"%5 G(2), 0-0.
MalhoLra, & 8lrks. (2007). 2&$L+4/%1 *+>+&$09< &% &DD'/+@ &DD$"&09< P$@ H#$"D+&% H@/4/"%: Þearson LducaLlon.
MalLz. (1998). CusLomer Servlce ln Lhe ulsLrlbuLor Channel Lmplrlcal llndlngs. !"#$%&' ") M#>/%+>> ="1/>4/0>.
MarmorsLeln, Crewal, & llshe. (1992). 1he value of Llme spenL ln prlce-comparlson shopplng: survey and
experlmenLal evldence. !"#$%&' ") 0"%>#3+$ $+>+&$09, 32-61.
Morrell. (2000). 1he 100 percenL accuracy game. 2"@+$% 2&4+$/&'> X&%@'/%15 GG(6), 26-29.
Murphy, & Lnls. (1986). Classlfylng producLs sLraLeglcally. 89+ !"#$%&' ") 2&$L+4/%1, 24-42.
newLon. (2001). Pome dellvery can make or break a 82C. E#DD'Q C9&/% 2&%&1+3+%4 *+,/+B5 G(1), 21-24.


61
nunes, & Cespedes. (2003). 1he cusLomer has escaped. X&$,&$@ ;#>/%+>> $+,/+B5 J6(11), 96.
Ckada, & Poch. (2004). Spendlng Llme versus spendlng money. !"#$%&' ") 0"%>#3+$ $+>+&$095 P6(2), 313-323.
ÞeLerson, 8alasubramanlan, & 8ronnenberg. (1997). Lxplorlng Lhe lmpllcaLlons of Lhe lnLerneL for consumer
markeLlng. !"#$%&' ") 49+ ?0&@+3Q ") 2&$L+4/%1 E0/+%0+5 7G(4), 329-346.
8andall, & ulrlch. (2001). ÞroducL varleLy, supply chaln sLrucLure, and flrm performance: analysls of Lhe uS
blcycle lndusLry. 2&%&1+3+%4 E0/+%0+5 FK(12), 1388-1604.
8ao, Crlffls, & Coldsby. (2011). lallure Lo dellver? Llnklng onllne order fulfllmenL gllLches wlLh fuLure purchase
behavlor. !"#$%&' ") ID+$&4/"%> 2&%&1+3+%45 7V(7), 692-703.
8elchheld, & SchefLer. (2000). L-loyalLy: your secreL weapon on Lhe web. X&$,&$@ ;#>/%+>> $+,/+B5 KJ(4), 103-
113.
Sekaran, & 8ougle. (2010). 8esearch meLhods for buslness: A sklll bulldlng approach. Wlley: London.
Sharman. (1984). 1he redlscovery of loglsLlcs. X&$,&$@ ;#>/%+>> $+,/+B5 R7(3), 71-79.
Srlnlvasan, Anderson, & Þonnavolu. (2002). CusLomer loyalLy ln e-commerce: an exploraLlon of lLs anLecedenLs
and consequences. !"#$%&' ") *+4&/'/%15 KJ(1), 41-30. dol: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-
4359(01)00065-3
SLock, & LamberL. (2001). SLraLeglc loglsLlcs managemenL.
Swlnyard, & SmlLh. (2003). Why people (don'L) shop onllne: a llfesLyle sLudy of Lhe lnLerneL consumer.
.>Q09"'"1Q - 2&$L+4/%15 7N(7), 367-397.
1arn, 8azl, Wen, & Þerez. (2003). L-fulfllmenL: Lhe sLraLegy and operaLlonal requlremenLs. ="1/>4/0> S%)"$3&4/"%
2&%&1+3+%45 6R(3), 330-362.
1hlrumalal, & Slnha. (2003). CusLomer saLlsfacLlon wlLh order fulfllmenL ln reLall supply chalns: lmpllcaLlons of
producL Lype ln elecLronlc 82C LransacLlons. !"#$%&' ") ID+$&4/"%> 2&%&1+3+%45 7P(3), 291-303.
vochL, u. (2009). 8aslshandboek SÞSS 17. SÞSS SLaLlsLlcs: uLrechL: 8l[leveld Þress.
xlng, CranL, Mcklnnon, & lernle. (2010). Þhyslcal dlsLrlbuLlon servlce quallLy ln onllne reLalllng. S%4+$%&4/"%&'
!"#$%&' ") .9Q>/0&' W/>4$/;#4/"% - ="1/>4/0> 2&%&1+3+%45 FN(3), 413-432.
?ao, kuraLa, & Mukhopadhyay. (2008). lncenLlves Lo rellable order fulfllmenL for an lnLerneL drop-shlpplng
supply chaln. S%4+$%&4/"%&' !"#$%&' ") .$"@#04/"% H0"%"3/0>5 66P(1), 324-334.





62
AÞÞLnul x A. CuLS1l CnnAl 8L







63








64








65







66
AÞÞLnul x 8. CvL8vl LW l nuLx CA8uS





Card ID Time Slot Length Time of the day Delivery Fees
1 Time slot 8 hours Daytime Free
2 Time slot 4 hour Daytime Seven Euro
3 Time slot 2 hour Evening Ten Euro
4 Time slot 8 hours Daytime Four Euro
5 Time slot 2 hour Daytime Sixteen Euro
6 Time slot 4 hour Daytime Four Euro
7 Time slot 2 hour Daytime Ten Euro
8 Time slot 2 hour Evening Sixteen Euro
9 Time slot 8 hours Daytime Seven Euro
10 Time slot 4 hour Daytime Free
11 Time slot 4 hour Daytime Sixteen Euro
12 Time slot 8 hours Daytime Ten Euro
13 Time slot 2 hour Daytime Free
14 Time slot 2 hour Evening Four Euro
15 Time slot 2 hour Daytime Seven Euro
16 Time slot 2 hour Evening Free
17 Time slot 8 hours Daytime Sixteen Euro
18 Time slot 2 hour Daytime Four Euro
19 Time slot 2 hour Evening Seven Euro
20 Time slot 4 hour Daytime Ten Euro


67
AÞÞLnul x C. lnuLx CA8uS


























7 (9.1°)

13

(19.3°)

18


(23.4°)
16 (20.8°)

21

(27.3°)
13 (16.9°)

31

(40.3°)

17


(22.1°)
14 (18.2°)

2

(2.6°)
22 (28.6°)

23

(29.9°)

16


(20.8°)
11 (14.3°)

3

(6.3°)
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
1
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' : ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') =%,9&.

2
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' > ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? @ABB

3
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) C$2'3
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' D ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? EBABB



68



























21 (27.3°)

28

(36.4°)

18


(23.4°)
10 (13.0°)

0

(0°)
37 (48.1°)

17

(22.1°)

11


(14.3°)
9 (11.7°)

3

(3.9°)
3 (4.0°)

14

(18.7°)

33


(44.0°)
21 (28.0°)

4

(3.3°)
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
4
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' : ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? >ABB

3
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' D ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? EFABB

6
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' > ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? >ABB



69



























19 (23.3°)

30

(40.0°)

17


(22.7°)
8 (10.7°)

1

(1.3°)
48 (64.0°)

13

(17.3°)

8


(10.7°)
4 (3.3°)

2

(2.7°)
33 (46.7°)

26

(34.7°)

8


(10.7°)
4 (3.3°)

2

(2.7°)
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
7
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' D ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? EBABB

8
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) C$2'3
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' D ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? EFABB

9
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' : ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? @ABB



70



























3 (4.0°)

3

(4.0°)

3


(6.7°)
13 (20.0°)

49

(63.3°)
38 (77.3°)

11

(14.7°)

4


(3.3°)
2 (2.7°)

0

(0°)
49 (63.3°)

18

(24.0°)

7


(9.3°)
1 (1.3°)

0

(0°)
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
10
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' > ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') =%,9&.

11
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' > ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? EFABB

12
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' : ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? EBABB



71



























0 (0°)

1

(1.3°)

2


(2.7°)
16 (21.3°)

36

(74.7°)
6 (8.0°)

9

(12.0°)

18


(24.0°)
28 (37.3°)

14

(18.7°)
26 (34.7°)

26

(34.7°)

16


(21.3°)
7 (9.3°)

0

(0°)
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
13
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' D ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') =%,9&.

14
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) C$2'3
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' D ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? >ABB

13
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' D ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? @ABB



72



























0 (0°)

0

(0°)

2


(2.7°)
10 (13.7°)

61

(83.6°)
37 (78.1°)

13

(17.8°)

1


(1.4°)
0 (0°)

2

(2.7°)
2 (2.7°)

18

(24.7°)

29


(39.7°)
19 (26°)

3

(6.8°)
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
16
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) C$2'3
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' D ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') =%,9&.

17
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' : ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? EFABB

18
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' D ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? >ABB



73




























14 (19.2°)

26

(33.6°)

13


(21.9°)
11 (13.1°)

6

(8.2°)
34 (46.6°)

28

(38.4°)

3


(6.8°)
3 (4.1°)

3

(4.1°)
'
%
"
$
&
'
%
"
$
&
19
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) C$2'3
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' D ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? @ABB

20
"#$#%&'() *+ ,-.+%,,/ 0#12%(3
4,(3##5) *$#%3,(
6&73$,/) 8' 9&73$,/ $,' > ;;%
<#%1#'3/2.9#') ? EBABB



74
AÞÞLnul x u. Þ8CuuC1 1?ÞLS Anu uLLl vL8? lLLS


Preference of the respondents for time slot delivery presented for each product:















Book Preference score
Delivery fee 1 2 3 4 5
4 euros 0 7 5 7 5
7 euros 8 7 7 3 0
10 euros 3 13 3 5
1
16 euros 9 6 6 4
3
Total 20 33 21 19
9 Table 1 Preference Book
Jeans Preference score
Delivery fee 1 2 3 4 5
4 euros 0 5 11 7 0
7 euros 9 10 6 3 0
10 euros 10 5 7 2
0
16 euros 16 5 2 2
0
Total 35 25 26 14
0 Table 2 Preference Jeans
Laptop Preference score
Delivery fee 1 2 3 4 5
4 euros 2 6 13 5 0
7 euros 9 9 3 1 0
10 euros 6 12 7 1
0
16 euros 12 6 3 3
0
Total 29 33 26 10
0 Table 3 Preference Laptop


75
AÞÞLnul x L. MAÞ ul S18l 8u1l Cn 8LSÞCnuLn1S


















Scan the QR code to zoom in or out on the distribution of the respondents.