The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0263-5577.htm

Inventory management with online Inventory

management
payment and preorder discounts with online
payment
Md. Rakibul Hasan
Mathematics, Hajee Mohammad Danesh Science and Technology University,
Dinajpur, Bangladesh
Yosef Daryanto Received 30 May 2020
Industrial Engineering, Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, Indonesia Revised 14 August 2020
Accepted 14 September 2020
Tutul Chandra Roy
Mathematics, Hajee Mohammad Danesh Science and Technology University,
Dinajpur, Bangladesh, and
Yi Feng
School of Management and Economics,
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China

Abstract
Purpose – The advancement of technology opens many opportunities for retailing businesses to increase their
profit through innovative strategies, such as discount offers, preorder programs and online payment services.
The purpose of this study is to investigate decision-making methods for retailers who sell deteriorating
products that utilize an e-commerce platform and offering preorder.
Design/methodology/approach – The authors study the optimum price and replenishment cycle when
multiple discounts policy is implemented for customers when they purchase during the preorder period and
make the payment via an online system. The proposed economic order quantity model works for
noninstantaneous deteriorating items that will maximize the total profit. Moreover, it considers the effect of
selling price and advertisement on customer demand. The concavity of the profit function is proved. Then, a
comparison is carried out between the traditional payment system and online payment. Finally, two numerical
examples and the sensitivity analysis are performed.
Findings – The results show the benefit of the system with online payment compared to the traditional one.
Further analysis shows that the total profit increases when the frequency of advertisement, interest from the
banking company, location perimeter and the nondeterioration time increase.
Originality/value – The proposed model guides e-commerce retailers optimizing the price and inventory
decision when they offer a discount, preorder program and online payment service. No researcher has
undergone a study with this complexity.
Keywords Inventory model and optimization, Economic order quantity, Discount, Online payment, Preorder,
Deteriorating items
Paper type Research paper

Notations and description

Notations Description
L Lead time
d1 Discount on the price for preorder and online payment
d2 Discount on the price due to online payment
α Area parameter
β Selling price coefficient

The authors want to thank the editor and reviewers for their contributions in improving the quality of
Industrial Management & Data
this paper. Systems
Funding: This research received no external funding. © Emerald Publishing Limited
0263-5577
Conflict of interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. DOI 10.1108/IMDS-05-2020-0314
IMDS A The intensity of advertisement per unit time
pc Purchasing price per unit
hc Holding cost per unit
kb The interest rate earned from mobile banking company
θ Deterioration rate
S Maximum stock per cycle
S1 Stocks for preordered items
S2 Stocks after delivering the preorder items
TPðp; TÞ Total profit per unit time

Decision variable
P Selling price per unit
T Replenishment cycle.

1. Introduction
The advancement of technology opens many opportunities for retailing business. Nowadays,
e-commerce becomes an important channel for retailers to reach a broader market.
E-commerce offers cost reduction in operations in addition to almost unlimited reach (Burt
and Sparks, 2003). Almost all products can be purchased online including perishable
products such as fruits and vegetables. This kind of business grows massively also in
developing countries. For example, Othoba (See https://www.othoba.com/) and Parmeeda
(See https://parmeeda.com/) are two growing online retailers in Bangladesh and sell hundreds
of fruits and vegetable products on their website. The customers are households that
consume the product and small retailers who will resell it. All customers would want a variety
of facilities and perfect service. In addition, price is always a basic customer consideration.
Therefore, e-commerce is competing to be efficient and excellent.
Hagberg et al. (2016) explored the digitalization in a retail operation, which has
transformed the way of communication, transaction and distribution in the retailing
business. For example, digitalization in purchase introduces the application of online
payment through credit and debit card, and a recently developed mobile payment (Mallat and
Tuunainen, 2005). Online payment companies (service providers) are very careful to increase
their cash flow. To uphold this strategy, online payment companies (e.g. banks) are going to
collaborate with different business units so that customers feel the interest to use these
banking for their payment. To do this, companies are offering discounts/cashback on
payment through their system.
Preorder or advance booking is an advanced selling practice that is common in a
particular business such as electronic product retailing. Similar preorder service can be
implemented on perishable products (Huang, 2015). For example, Othoba is practicing such
service on seasonal fruits (See https://www.othoba.com/bkash-cashback-terms-conditions).
Tang et al. (2002, 2004) identified the importance of a preorder program for perishable
products such as seasonal fruits due to a long replenishment lead time but a short selling
period. The program offers a discount price for orders before the selling season, hence
provides better information for demand forecast.
Technological advances not only open up many opportunities but also put pressure on retail
business players, especially those who have not been able to adopt this technology as their
competitors. In the changing business trend, e-commerce organizations use online payment
systems that bring a lot of efficiency in business operations and convenience to customers.
Retailers also implement preorder programs with discount offers to attract customers’ orders
and to get clearer demand information. This work extends previous studies by introducing
multiple discounts based on online purchase/payment and preorder into an economic order Inventory
quantity (EOQ) model of a retailer. The proposed model also considers the effect of price and management
advertisement on demand. From the literature review, there is a rare study that has
incorporated both discounts in an EOQ model although they are common in practice. The study
with online
is inspired by real cases in fruits and vegetables online shop that sells a variety of products payment
including seasonal items. As customer demand depends on the offered discounts and price, the
retailer must determine the optimum price and inventory to maximize its profit. The
deterioration of fruits and vegetable products adds the complexity of the inventory decision.
Hence, this research will study the online retailer’s challenges: (1) What is the optimum unit
selling price and inventory replenishment cycle that will maximize the profit? (2) How do
multiple discounts from the preorder program and online payment affect inventory levels and
total profit? (3) How do key factors such as demand parameters, advertisement intensity,
deterioration rate and nondeterioration period affect the optimal decision?
Following this introduction, we review the related literature that supports this study in
Section 2. Section 3 introduces the research assumptions and notations of the model. Section 4
presents the model development, some theoretical derivations and the solution algorithm.
Section 5 illustrates the model through numerical examples and presents some studies to gain
managerial insights. The last section summarizes the result and identifies some topics for
further study.

2. Literature review
This study is related to several streams of inventory model literature, i.e. inventory model of
online stores, inventory model with the preorder program, inventory model for
noninstantaneous deteriorating items, inventory model with multiple discounts and with
variable demand. Our review is presented below.
The general acceptance of online payment has followed the emergence of online stores.
This smart technology is mainly accepted by young customers (Wolner-R€oßlhuber et al.,
2013; Priporas et al., 2017). Online payment increases business revenue and cost efficiency by
speeding up the transaction and reducing the work (Mallat and Tuunainen, 2005; Taylor,
2016). For example, technology such as mobile payment provides convenience and impulses
customer spending (Garrett et al., 2014). Hsieh et al. (2013) also identified a positive
relationship between promotion by a third-party like a mobile banking company with the
customer’s demand. The growing online business inspires studies on the inventory control of
online and multi-channel stores. For example, Chen et al. (2014) optimized the replenishment
decision of an online store. Recently, He et al. (2020) studied the inventory and pricing decision
of a dual-channel retailer selling deteriorating products. However, the studies on online stores
that considered the deteriorating products are still limited. No one considered a price and
advertisement dependent demand with the effect of discount.
Weatherford and Pfeifer (1994) settled the study on the economic value of the preorder
program. It may help the retailer manage accurate forecasts, segment the market and control
the inventory (Tang et al., 2002; McCardle et al., 2004; Chu and Zhang, 2011; Li and Zhang,
2013). To attract customers, a preorder program is accompanied by discounts (Tang et al.,
2004). Bellantuono et al. (2009) optimized the price discount and order quantity for a supply
chain with a preorder program. Gao et al. (2012) considered a special price and the effect of
weather conditions in studying the preorder program for general seasonal products. Dye and
Hsieh (2013) and He et al. (2019) extended the study on the inventory model with a preorder
discount program incorporating the effect of deterioration. However, their studies worked for
offline stores. In our proposed model, we consider online stores with a preorder discount and
an additional discount originated from the efficiency of online payment.
This study considers the items which are noninstantaneously deteriorating. Deterioration
is a natural phenomenon in terms of continuous degradation in quality and quantity such as
IMDS in food and chemical products, and value reduction such as in fashion and electronic products
(Wee, 1999). A noninstantaneous deteriorating product starts its degradation after a certain
nondeteriorating time (Ouyang et al., 2006). Previous studies identified the impact of the
length of the nondeteriorating period on the total cost and profit (Tiwari et al., 2016; Shaikh
et al., 2017; and Mashud et al., 2018). This study also considers the length of the
nondeteriorating period on the total profit together with the effect of multiple discounts and
variable demand.
The proposed model integrates the online payment system and preorder program into the
EOQ model under multiple discounts offering. For many years, scholars have studied the
relationship between discount offerings on the EOQ model. Discount may induce customer
purchase (Tersine and Barman, 1991), also helps to achieve the economies of scale on order
processing and delivery costs (Benton and Park, 1996). Similar benefits work in online
shopping (Blazewicz et al., 2014). Retailers may offer multiple discounts to boost customer
demand (Pereira and Costa, 2015). Tersine and Barman (1991) developed multiple discounts
EOQ model considering quantity and transportation discounts, while Khouja (1995) and
Khouja and Mehrez (1996) considered multiple discounts for selling the excess inventory in a
newsboy inventory problem. Moon et al. (2016) extended the model by considering multiple
upgrades on the quality of the excess inventory. However, the previous research did not
incorporate discounts from online payment as part of the multiple discounts. Our study
considers a discount offered by online retail similar to Chen et al. (2018). Chen et al. (2018)
proposed the launch of a discount program for an online retailer to strengthen its position in a
supply chan competition, but the study did not consider multiple discounts and other factors
such as deterioration rate.
In general, the selling price of a product is a strategic instrument to manipulate customer
demand (Li et al., 2019). Kong et al. (2017) modeled a pricing strategy for an online supply
chain system. A marketing program is another important instrument in business. Intensive
promotion and advertising give a considerable impact on a customer’s willingness to buy
(G€uler, 2019; Taleizadeh and Sherafati, 2019). Group of researchers studied the joint effect of
advertisement activities and pricing decisions on customer demand of the EOQ model.
Subramanyam and Kumaraswamy (1981) added the frequency of advertisement into demand
function in addition to selling price and price elasticity. Shah et al. (2013) modified the demand
function and considered noninstantaneous deteriorating items to optimize the frequency of
advertisements. Palanivel and and Uthayakumar (2015) considered the effect of inflation and
partial backlogging. Hasan and Mashud (2019) considered continuous time dependent
demand. Recently, Mashud et al. (2020) added the effect of preservation technology and trade
credit payment into an EOQ model with price and advertising dependent demand. The above
studies confirmed the importance of pricing and advertising decisions in maximizing the total
profit. However, rare studies incorporated the preorder program and online payment
simultaneously as this paper does. Further, in this paper, the customer who purchases during
the preorder period with online payment will get a higher discount as most e-commerce
websites do today.

3. Model assumptions
In the beginning, the retailer orders the products from a supplier. The supplier needs time to
fulfill the order; hence, the products will arrive after a lead time L. In the middle of the lead
time (i.e. at t ¼ −L2), the retailer announces for preorder with a discount offer. Further, this
study has the following assumptions:
(1) Lead time is considered.
 (2) Retailer set an agreement with a certain mobile banking company with the following Inventory
terms: management
 Customers pay the products through an online application of a mobile banking with online
company. payment
 Bank will give a percentage kb of interest to the retailer on the revenue which paid
through them.
 Bank will promote the retailer’s product to customers.
 The retailer has to offer a price discount at least k2b percentage of the selling price.
(3) The retailer offers a price discount d1 to customers during t ∈ ½−L2 ; 0. The customer’s
preorder will be delivered when the order arrived, 8
that is when stoke is maximum to
avoid the holding cost. >
< α − βðp − d Þ þ A ; − L ≤ t ≤ 0
1
(4) The deterministic demand rate follows Dðp; AÞ ¼ 2 .
>
: α − βðp − d2 Þ þ A ; 0 ≤ t ≤ T
where α > 0; β > 0
The price-dependent demand function is similar to that considered by Yao et al. (2008) and
Wang et al. (2010). Then, Palanivel and Uthayakumar (2015) considered promotion effect on
demand to increase the customers’ interest in buying. Therefore, in this demand model, we
combine the discount effect with selling price and promotion/advertisement. Since the
discount determines the selling price, then our proposed demand pattern is sensitive to the
selling price (p) and promotion frequency (A).
After the preorder period, the retailer offers a price discount d2 to customers during
t ∈ ½0; T. To ensure the retailer’s profit from online payment, d2 ¼ pknb, where 1 ≤ n ≤ 2. The
retailer sets a discount factor n. According to the agreement, the retailer has to offer a
discount d2 at least half of the kb times p (see assumption b). So, the upper limit of n is 2. One
the other hand, if n is less than 1, knb is higher than the interest given by mobile banking
company. So, n must not be less than 1 to maintain the profit. When the value of n is 1, then the
retailer offers a full discount kb percentage of p that they got from a banking company to
stimulate the customers’ demand without loss. Also, to make a higher discount for customer
who purchases during the preorder period with online payment, d1 ¼ d2 þ hc
(5) Inventory level for preorder by the customer is I1 ðtÞ in t ∈ −L2 ; 0
(6) The product has noninstantaneous deterioration. When the deterioration starts, the
rate is θ.
I2(t) is the inventory level in t ∈ ½0; t1  without deterioration
I3(t) is the inventory level in t ∈ ½t1 ; T with deterioration
(7) Shortages are not allowed for this arrangement.
(8) There are two following cases that are studied:
Case I: Considering the model with an online payment system
Case II: Considering the model with a traditional payment system

4. Mathematical formulation
Here, an EOQ model of a retaileris formulated. The total inventory I1 ðtÞ is accumulated from
preorder in the period −L2 ; 0 . After the arrival, the inventory I2 ðtÞ is sold from the
warehouse in the period ½0; t1 . At the time t ¼ t1, the deterioration begins. From t ¼ t1 the
IMDS inventory I3 ðtÞ depleted by demand and deterioration, and it will reach zero at t 5 T. Figure 1
shows the appearance of the inventory level versus time.
Therefore, the inventory system8 described by the resulting differential equation and
>
< α − βðp − d Þ þ A ; − L ≤ t ≤ 0
1
considering demand Dðp; AÞ ¼ 2 are:
>
: α − βðp − d Þ þ A ; 0 ≤ t ≤ T
2
8
>
> L
>
> α  βðp  d1 Þ þ A ;  ≤t ≤0
dI ðtÞ < 2
¼  ½α  βðp  Þ þ ; ≤ t ≤ t1 (1)
dt >
> d2 A 0
>
>
: θI ðtÞ  ½α  βðp  d Þ þ A ; t ≤ t ≤ T
2 1

With conditions I1 ðtÞ ¼ 0 at t ¼ −L2 and I1 ðtÞ ¼ S1 at t ¼ 0,

I2 ðtÞ ¼ S2 at t ¼ 0 and I2 ðtÞ ¼ I3 ðtÞ at t ¼ t1 I3 ðtÞ ¼ 0 at t ¼ T
8
>
> L
>
< I1 ðtÞ if  2 ≤ t ≤ 0
>
and I ðtÞ ¼ I ðtÞ if 0 ≤ t ≤ t (2)
>
> 2 1
>
>
: I ðtÞ if t ≤ t ≤ T
3 1

S1

I2(t)

S = S1 + S2
S2
I3(t)

I1(t)
S1

Figure 1. T
Pictorial appearances t = – –L t1
of I(t): inventory 2
vs time
L
By solving equation (1), we get the following results Inventory
 
L management
I1 ðtÞ ¼ ½α  βðp  d1 Þ þ A t þ (3)
2 with online
I2 ðtÞ ¼ S2  ½α  βðp  d2 Þ þ At (4) payment
½α  βðp  d2 Þ þ A  θðT−tÞ 
I3 ðtÞ ¼ e 1 (5)
θ
 
L
S1 ¼ ½α  βðp  d1 Þ þ A
2
½α  βðp  d2 Þ þ A  θðT−t1 Þ
S2 ¼ e  1 þ θt1 Þ
θ
 
½α  βðp  d2 Þ þ A  θðT−t1 Þ L
S ¼ S1 þ S2 ¼ e  1 þ θt1 Þ þ ½α  βðp  d1 Þ þ A (6)
θ 2

4.1 Revenues
There are two types of stocks from which the retailer will earn revenues by selling them, one
of which is the retailer’s stock from the preordered items and the other is the items that will be
sold in time ½0; T from the warehouse.
Then, revenue from preordered products:
Z 0
SR1 ¼ ðp  d1 Þ ½α  βðp  d1 Þ þ A dt
−L
2

Revenue from regular products in time ½0; T:

Z T
SR2 ¼ ðp  d2 Þ ½α  βðp  d2 Þ þ A dt
0

Since the retailer has an agreement with a mobile banking company that will pay to the
retailer kb percentage of total revenue from the customers’ payment through their banking
system, the total revenue becomes:
SR ¼ ðSR1 þ SR2 Þðkb þ 1Þ

L
SR ¼ ðp  d1 Þ½α  βðp  d1 Þ þ A þ ðp  d2 Þ½α  βðp  d2 Þ þ A T ðkb þ 1Þ (7)
2

4.2 Investments
At the beginning of every cycle, there is an ordering cost OC. Besides, the total investment of
the retailer consists of:
Holding cost: According to the proposed model, the stock S1 will be delivered at the end of
lead time (at the delivery time) and only stock S2 will stay in the retailer warehouse. Therefore,
the retailer has to invest in holding products in S2 stock. Then, holding cost:
 Z t1 Z T 
HC ¼ hc I2 ðtÞdtþ I3 ðtÞdt
0 t1
IMDS  2 
t eθðT−t1 Þ 1 T t1
HC ¼ S2 t1 hc þ hc ½α  βðp  d2 Þ þ A − 1 þ   þ (8)
2 θ2 θ2 θ θ

Deterioration cost: Since we consider that products are noninstantaneously perishable, then
after a certain period the products start to decay. For this reason, some products will be lost in
the warehouse. The price of the lost products due to deterioration is called deterioration cost.
Then, the deterioration cost:
Z T
DC ¼ pc θ I3 ðtÞdt
t1

 θðT−t1 Þ 
e 1
DC ¼ pc ½α  βðp  d2 Þ þ A   T þ t1 (9)
θ θ

Purchase cost: The expenses in buying all ordered products from the supplier is called total
purchase cost. Then, the total purchase cost is:

PC ¼ pc S
  
½α  βðp  d2 Þ þ A  θðT−t1 Þ L
PC ¼ pc e  1 þ θt1 Þ þ ½α  βðp  d1 Þ þ A (10)
θ 2

4.3 Total profit

Profit is the ultimate target of a retailer. The retailer needs to apply optimal policies that can
increase the demand as well as revenues. So, profit is proportional to revenues. On the other
hand, the costs reduce the total profit. Finally, the total profit comes from the following
formula:

X ¼ SR  OC  HC  DC  PC

Regarding the online payments, the total profit for the two different cases can be constructed
as follows:
Case I
The total profit function per cycle for the model with an online payment system that can be
helpful to earn more profit, because customers get much attraction on getting discounts
through such payment system is
X
TP1 ðp; TÞ ¼
T
1
TP1 ðp; TÞ ¼ ½SR  OC  HC  DC  PC
T
 2
3
L
6 ðp  d 1 Þ½ α  βðp  d 1 Þ þ A þ ðp  d 2 Þ½ α  βðp  d 2 Þ þ AT ðk b þ 1Þ  OC 7 Inventory
6 2 7
6
6   
7
7
management
6 ½α  βðp  d Þ þ A  θðT−t Þ L 7 with online
6 pc 2
e 1
 1 þ θt Þ þ ½ α  βðp  d Þ þ A 7
6 θ
1 1 7
16
6
2 7
7
payment
TP1 ðp; TÞ ¼ 6   7
T6 2
t1 e θðT−t1 Þ
1 T t1 7
6 hc S2 t1  hc ½α  βðp  d2 Þ þ A  þ   þ 7
6 2 θ2 θ2 θ θ 7
6 7
6   7
6 θðT−t1 Þ 7
4 e 1 5
pc ½α  βðp  d2 Þ þ A   T þ t1
θ θ
(11)

Case II
In this case, the retailer has no agreement with a bank. So, there is no additional discount
offered to the customer because the payment system is traditional, i.e. for A ¼ 0 and kb ¼ 0.
But, still there will be a scope of profit. Therefore, the total profit function per cycle TP2 ðp; TÞ
is presented in terms of profit TP1 ðp; TÞ in the following relation:
TP2 ðp; TÞ ¼ TP1 ðp; TÞkb ¼0;A¼0

With some simplification, we may obtain:

pσ 1  p2 σ 2 þ σ 3
0TP2 ðp; TÞ ¼ þ ½pT σ 4  T σ 5 þ pσ 6  σ 7   p2 σ 8 (12)
T
where,
  2 
L L pc t1 hc θt13 L
σ 1 ¼ ðα þ βhc Þ þ β ðhc þ pc Þ þ þ ; σ2 ¼ β > 0
2 2 θ 2 2
 2   
L pt h θt 3 p h θt h
σ 3 ¼ − ðα þ βhc Þðhc þ pc Þ  OC  α c 1 þ c 1 ; σ 4 ¼ β c þ c 1 þ c
2 θ 2 θ 2 2
   
p h θt h p ½θ  2t1 
σ5 ¼ α c þ c 1 þ c ; σ6 ¼ α  β  c  hc ð1  θt1 Þt1 þ hc t1
θ 2 2 θ
 
p ½θ  2t1 
σ7 ¼ α  c  hc ð1  θt1 Þt1 þ hc t1 ; σ 8 ¼ β
θ

4.4 Concavity test of the objective function

To show the maximization of the objective function, a concavity test is the basic
mathematical criteria. So, we examine the conditions of the concavity of the total profit
function. By putting the value of d1 and d2 in equation (11) and taking some algebraic
simplification, we may obtain:
pω1  p2 ω2 þ ω3
TP1 ðp; TÞ ¼ þ ½pT ω4  T ω5 þ pω6  ω7   p2 ω8 (13)
T
IMDS Where,
!    2 
L k2b kb βkb L pc t1 hc θt13
ω1 ¼ ðα þ βhc þ AÞ kb þ 1   þ β ðhc þ hc kb þ pc Þ þ þ
2 n n n 2 θ 2
  !  2 
L βkb k2 kb L pc t1 hc θt13
ω2 ¼ β kb þ 1  b  ; ω3 ¼ − ðα þ βhc þ AÞðhc þ hc kb þ pc Þ  OC  ðα þ AÞ þ
2 n n n 2 θ 2
    
βkb pc hc θt1 hc pc hc θt1 hc
ω4 ¼ β  þ þ ; ω5 ¼ ðα þ AÞ þ þ
n θ 2 2 θ 2 2
    
k βk pc ½θ  2t1 
ω6 ¼ ðα þ AÞ 1  b ðkb þ 1Þ  β  b   hc ð1  θt1 Þt1 þ hc t1
n n θ
   2
p ½θ  2t1  kb
ω7 ¼ ðα þ AÞ  c  hc ð1  θt1 Þt1 þ hc t1 ; ω8 ¼ β 1  ðkb þ 1Þ > 0
θ n

The optimization problem is

Maximize TP1 ðp; TÞ Subject to
L
− ≤ t1 ≤ T;
2
Dðp; AÞ > 0
S ¼ S1 þ S2

For the given p and T, the necessary conditions for the existence of optimum solution of the
optimization problem (13) are
vTP1 ðp; TÞ
¼0
vT
vTP1 ðp; TÞ 1  
0 ¼ − 2 pω1  p2 ω2 þ ω3 þ pω4  ω5 ¼ 0 (14)
vT T
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
pω1 þ ðpÞ2 ω2 þ ω3
T¼
pω4  ω5
vTP1 ðp; TÞ
¼0
vp
vTP1 ðp; TÞ ω1  2pω2
¼ þ T ω4 þ ω6  2pω8 ¼ 0 (15)
vp T
ω1 þ ðTÞ2 ω4 þ T ω6
p¼
2ω2 þ 2T ω8

Solving equations (13) and (14) bring the most economical value of p and T. If
TP1 ðp*; T*Þ ≥ TP1 ðp; TÞ for all values of p and T then the optimum solution is
0 sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1
ω1 þ ðT*Þ ω4 þ T*ω6
2
p*ω1 þ ðp*Þ2 ω2 þ ω3 A
ðp; TÞ ¼ ðp*; T*Þ ≡ @ ;
2ω2 þ 2T*ω8 p*ω4  ω5
Theorem 1. The profit TP1 is a concave function p for a given T. Inventory
v2 TP1 management
Proof: The sufficient condition for concavity is vp2
< 0
Differentiating (14) with respect to p we get with online

payment
v2 TP1 v ω1  2pω2
¼ þ T ω4 þ ω6  2pω8
vp2 vp T
 
1
¼ −2ω2  2ω8 < 0 (16)
T

Hence, the total profit TP1 is a concave function of p for all input parameters of the
proposed model.
Theorem 2. The profit TP1 is a concave function T for a given p.
Proof: The sufficient condition for concavity is vvT
2
TP1
2 < 0
Differentiating (13) with respect to T we get

v2 TP1 v 1  
¼ − pω1  p 2
ω2 þ ω3 þ pω4  ω5
vT 2 vT T2
2  2 
¼ −p ω2 þ pω1 þ ω3 (17)
T3
We see the coefficient of p2 is −ω2 < 0 and ω21 − 4ð−ω2 Þω3 < 0 where, ω3 < 0. So, the
quadratic equation ð−p2 ω2 þ pω1 þ ω3 Þ is negative for all values of p. Since T always
positive, then from equation (16) it is confirmed that vvT
2
TP1
2 < 0. Therefore, the total profit TP1
is a concave function of T for all input parameters of the proposed model.
Theorem 3. The profit TP1 ðp; TÞ is a concave function of T and p for all other given
parameters if the Hessian matrix of TP1 ðp; TÞ is negatively defined.
Proof: Differentiating (13) with regard to p,

v2 TP1 ðp; TÞ v 1  
¼ − 2 pω1  p2 ω2 þ ω3 þ pω4  ω5
vTvp vp T
1
¼ − 2 ½ω1  2pω2  þ ω4
 2  nT
o 2

2 
v2 TP1 v2 TP1 v2 TP1 ω2 ðp ω2 − pω1 − ω3 Þ ω1
Now, vp2 : vT 2 − vpvT ¼ 4 T þ ω8 T3
− T 2 2ω2 þ ω4 − T 2
p
>0

Hence, from the above result and Theorems 1 and 2, the TP1 ðp; TÞ has a maximum value
for variables T and p at ðp*; T*Þ ⊆ R.

4.5 Algorithm
An algorithm has been constructed to solve both cases as follows:
Step 1. Input the model parameters L, t1, α, β, pc, hc, k8 b, θ, A
>
< α − βðp − d Þ þ A ; − L ≤ t ≤ 0
pkb 1
Step 2. Define d1 ¼ d2 þ hc, d2 ¼ n and Dðp; AÞ ¼ 2
>
: α − βðp − d Þ þ A ; 0 ≤ t ≤ T
2
Step 3. Calculate the inventory levels I1 ðtÞ; I2 ðtÞ; I3 ðtÞ by (3), (4), (5).
IMDS Step 4. Calculate maximum stock per cycle, S by (6).
Step 5. Then calculate SR, HC, DC, PC by (7), (8), (9), (10).
Step 6. Set the suitable Order cost OC.
Step 7. If A ¼ 0 and kb ¼ 0 GOTO Step 9 else GOTO step 8.
Step 8. Calculate TP1 ðp; TÞ by (11).
Step 9. Calculate TP2 ðp; TÞ by (12).
Step 10. Stop.

5. Numerical illustrations and comparison

Two numerical examples are provided to exemplify the established model with their
appropriate values.

5.1 Example 1
In Case I, consider Shakib fruits shop offers discounts for preorder and online payment, where
the ordering cost OC 5 $500 per order, holding cost per unit item hc 5 $1 with a purchasing
cost pc 5 $5 per unit. The advertisement frequency A 5 2 has been done by the banking
company and deterioration will start on the inventory after t1 ¼ 0:2 with the rate θ 5 0.2. The
interest rate earned from mobile banking company is kb ¼ 0:3, optimal lead time L 5 0.5 and
parameters n 5 2, α ¼ 500, β ¼ 35.

5.2 Example 2
If we consider there is no agreement with a mobile banking company (Case II), then there is no
interest earned from the banking company, i.e. kb ¼ 0 and the banking company will not
promote the products of Shakib fruit shop, i.e. A 5 0 when all other values remain the same
with Case I.
The optimal results for the above examples are obtained using the Generalized Reduced
Gradient (GRG) method. Table 1 provides the optimum results for both cases, while Figures
2–7 represent the profit function for Case I for Case II, respectively.
Comparison: It is clear that the model with an online payment system (Case I) is more
profitable than the model with the traditional payment system (Case II) from the above
numerical and graphical results. Figures 2 and 5 also prove the concavity of the total profit
function.
Analysis of sensitivity is conducted to study the consequence of the proposed model for
different parameters in this section for the Case I only because we already examined that Case
I gives better results than Case II from above numerical illustration. A sensitivity in Table 2 is
presented by changing the values of the parameters from þ20% to 20%. The outcomes are
accomplished by transforming each setting in turn and keeping different parameters at their
unique merits.

Results
Examples Condition S* p* T* TP * ðp; TÞ
Table 1.
Results for each Case I Payment through online application 198.331 11.304 0.850 858.4683
inventory model Case II Payment with traditional process 214.199 10.433 1.173 265.4545
 Inventory
850
management
with online
840
payment
830

820

810

800

790

780

770
Figure 2.
760 Total profit function
10.5 0.6 with regard to p and T
11 0.9 0.8 0.7
11.5 121.2 1.1 1 of Case I
p T

860

855

850

845
Total profit

840

835

830
Figure 3.
825 Total profit vs T of
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 Case I
T

The following observations have been done on the results of Table 2.

(1) Total profit TP * increases with the increasing values of A, kb, t1 and α but it decreases
with the increasing values of β, pc, hc and θ.
(2) Selling price p* increases when the parameters A, α, kb, hc, pc and θ increase meanwhile
it decreases with the increasing values of β, t1.
(3) Optimal cycle length T * increases with the increase of β, t1, pc and decreases for the
increasing values of A, α, kb, hc, θ.
(4) The amount of stocks S * increases with the increase of β, t1 and decreases with the
increase of A, α, kb, pc, hc, θ.
IMDS 900

800

700

600
Total profit

500

400

300

Figure 4.
Total profit vs p of 200
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Case I
p

250

200

150

100

50

-50
Figure 5.
Total profit function -100
with regard to p and T 9 1
9.5 10 10.5 1.5
of Case II 11 11.5 122
p T

We now take a look at the graphical representation of the effect of changes in the objective
function (total profit) with respect to time through the changes in the values of the related
parameters of this model. We change the parameters one by one remaining all the other
parameters unchanged and see what happens to the graph of the objective function. Here are
the graphs of the changes in total profit through the changes of the related parameters. Two
scenarios arrive while drawing the graphs.
 300
Inventory
management
250 with online
payment
200

150
Total profit

100

50

-50

Figure 6.
-100 Total profit vs T of
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 Case II
T

280

260

240
Total profit

220

200

180

Figure 7.
160 Total profit vs p of
9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 Case II
p

Figures 8–11 show the increasing of the total profit when parameter A, α, t1 and kb increase.
The objective function TP * increase with the increasing values of A, kb, t1 and α. Here we can
see that the increase of advertisement, the interest rate earned from a mobile banking
company, area parameter grows up the graph higher and higher, which is similar to the data
evaluation in Table 2.
Figures 12–15 show the decreasing of the total profit when the parameter of β, pc, hc and θ
increase. The objective function TP * decrease with the increasing values of β, pc, hc and θ.
IMDS Variations of parameters (20 to Variations in Variations in
Parameter 20%) TP* S* p* T*

A 1.6 855.1328 198.4360 11.29856 0.8519487

1.8 856.7997 198.3839 11.30154 0.8509959
2.2 860.1383 198.2790 11.30750 0.8490894
2.4 861.8100 198.2261 11.31048 0.8481357
α 400 197.4620 195.6309 9.881523 1.339647
450 486.6154 203.6251 10.57462 1.085082
550 1330.955 174.1254 12.07075 0.5915905
600 2037.248 75.34324 13.32009 0.7207416E-01
β 28 1614.335 138.1269 13.33608 0.4537748
31.5 1174.815 178.1963 12.18930 0.6944877
38.5 616.3106 209.2713 10.59102 0.9718831
42 425.8602 214.5457 10.00462 1.077167
kb 0.24 734.2607 204.2132 11.06687 0.9101004
0.27 795.9144 201.4250 11.18144 0.8801402
0.33 921.9329 194.9297 11.43629 0.8196680
0.36 986.3297 191.2120 11.57700 0.7888707
hc 0.8 875.7700 203.1564 11.22828 0.8708053
0.9 867.1410 200.6519 11.26618 0.8599829
1.1 849.7405 196.1801 11.34325 0.8409195
1.2 840.9476 194.1837 11.38236 0.8325545
t1 0.16 847.1224 197.4185 11.32607 0.8440954
0.18 852.8716 197.8483 11.31507 0.8469180
0.22 863.9133 198.8679 11.29439 0.8534673
0.24 869.2077 199.4567 11.28469 0.8571884
pc 4 1112.909 198.1080 10.79070 0.7633491
4.5 982.5182 199.0463 11.04591 0.8089123
5.5 740.5386 196.3283 11.56630 0.8883095
Table 2. 6 628.6026 193.2828 11.83131 0.9248871
Sensitivity θ 0.16 878.2115 209.1392 11.28611 0.9131541
investigation 0.18 868.0727 203.4409 11.29571 0.8798263
regarding various 0.22 849.3425 193.7175 11.31264 0.8232265
parameters 0.24 840.6486 189.5245 11.32015 0.7989229

Here we can see that the increase of selling price coefficient, purchasing price per unit, holding
cost per unit, deterioration rate grows down the graph lower, which is also similar to the data
evaluation in Table 2.
Managerial insight: From the observations of the sensitivity analysis, we noticed that for
the proposed model, the total profit increases when the frequency of advertisement, discount
from the third party, time of deterioration starts and location perimeter increase. Again, the
optimal selling price will be reduced with the delay of the deterioration starting time and cycle
length will decrease with the high frequency of advertisement, location perimeter and
discount from the third party. A retailer needs to maximize profit by reducing selling price
and cycle length because everyone wants to get more benefits within a short time. So, the
retailer has to do more advertisement with an optimal discount on selling price, control of
rising different unit costs and deterioration rate of products to get the maximum return
within minimum cycle length.

6. Concluding remarks
In common markets, selling price becomes the main buying consideration. This study
examined the pricing policy of a retailer by offering multiple discounts to boost customer
 Inventory
A=16
management
862 A=18
A*=2
with online
A=22 payment
A=24
860

858
Total profit

856

854

852

Figure 8.
850
0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1 1.05 1.1 Total profit through
T the change in A

2000 alpha = 400

alpha = 450
alpha = 500
alpha = 550
alpha = 600

1500

1000
Total profit

500

Figure 9.
Total profit through
-500
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 the change in α
T
IMDS 880
t1= 0.16
t1 = 0.18
870 t1* = 0.2
t1 = 0.22
t1 = 0.24
860

850

840
Total profit

830

820

810

800

Figure 10. 790

Total profit through 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
the change in t1
T

1000
kb = 0.24
kb = 0.27
kb* = 0.3
kb = 0.33
900
kb = 0.36

800
Total profit

700

600

500

Figure 11.
Total profit through 400
the change in kb 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
T
 1600
Inventory
beta = 28
management
1400 beta = 31.5
beta* = 35
with online
1200
beta = 38.5
beta = 42
payment
1000

800
Total profit

600

400

200

-200

-400 Figure 12.

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Total profit through
the change in β
T

920 hc = 0.8
hc = 0.9
hc* = 1
900 hc = 1.1
hc = 1.2

880

860

840
Total profit

820

800

780

760
Figure 13.
740 Total profit through
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 the change in hc
T

order. In addition, customer demand also affected by advertising activities. Considering the
benefit of a preorder program, a retailer provides a discount for customers when they
purchase during the lead time. Moreover, considering revenue from a banking company, the
retailer offers an additional discount to customers who pay the order via the bank’s online
payment system. The proposed model contributes a new approach to the EOQ model by
IMDS
pc=0.4
pc=4.5
pc*=5
1000 pc=5.5
pc=6

800

600
Total profit

400

200

0
Figure 14.
Total profit through 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
the change in pc
T

890
theta = 0.16
theta = 0.18
880 theta* = 0.2
theta = 0.22
theta = 0.24
870

860

850
Total profit

840

830

820

810

Figure 15.
Total profit through 800
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
the change in θ
T

incorporating the benefit of the current trend on online payment and preorder programs
simultaneously. The concavity of the total profit function has been proved.
The findings of this study lead to some practical and theoretical implications. Advanced
technologies, such as online payment systems, benefit both consumers and retailers. Hence,
online retailers and online payment companies (e.g. banks) can cooperate to provide better
services to customers such as discounts and advertisements. In a price and advertisement
dependent demand market, online payment with discount results in a higher profit compared
to the traditional payment. Further, multiple discounts can be implemented by combining Inventory
payment discounts and preorder discount. A retailer can optimize the selling price and management
replenishment cycle to maximize its profit. The sensitivity analysis shows that the total profit
increases when the frequency of advertisement, discount from the third party, location
with online
perimeter and nondeterioration time increase. payment
This study considers several features that relate to the retail business in a growing
e-commerce market. It considers an online payment system that brings efficiency and
convenience. Besides, the present study takes advantage of the preorder program by offering
a special discount. Future research may extend the model by allowing a certain situation in
which the customer cancel the confirmed order. Moreover, the proposed model did not allow
shortages. Therefore, future research may accommodate shortages and study different
backlogging situations.

References
Bellantuono, N., Giannoccaro, I., Pontrandolfo, P. and Tang, C.S. (2009), “The implications of joint
adoption of revenue sharing and advance booking discount programs”, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 121 No. 2, pp. 383-394.
Benton, W.C. and Park, S. (1996), “A classification of literature on determining the lot size under
quantity discounts”, European Jurnal of Operational Research, Vol. 92 No. 2, pp. 219-238.
Blazewicz, J., Bouvry, P., Kovalyov, M.Y. and Musial, J. (2014), “Internet shopping with price sensitive
discounts”, 4OR – A Quarterly Journals of Operations Research, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 35-48.
Burt, S. and Sparks, L. (2003), “E-commerce and the retail process: a review”, Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 275-286.
Chen, Y., Chiu, F., Huang, Y. and Yeh, C. (2014), “Product image allocation and inventory control of
online stores”, Kybernetes, Vol. 43 No. 7, pp. 968-983.
Chen, J., Pun, H. and Li, W. (2018), “Using online channel to differ the launch of discount retailing store”,
Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 120, pp. 96-115.
Chu, L.Y. and Zhang, H. (2011), “Optimal preorder strategy with endogenous information control”,
Management Science, Vol. 57 No. 6, pp. 1055-1077.
Dye, C.Y. and Hsieh, T.P. (2013), “Joint pricing and ordering policy for an advance booking service
with partial order cancellations”, Applied Mathematical Modelling, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 3645-3659.
Gao, F., Demirag, O.C. and Chen, F.Y. (2012), “Early sales of seasonal products with weather-
conditional rebates”, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 778-794.
Garrett, J.L., Rodermund, R., Anderson, N., Berkowitz, S. and Robb, C.A. (2014), “Adoption of mobile
payment technology by consumers”, Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, Vol. 42
No. 2, pp. 358-368.
uler, M.G. (2019), “Advertising and forecasting investments of a newsvendor”, 4OR – A Quarterly
G€
Journal of Operations Research, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 45-73.
Hagberg, J., Sundstrom, M. and Egels-Zanden, N. (2016), “The digitalization of retailing: an
exploratory framework”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 44
No. 7, pp. 694-712.
Hasan, M.R. and Mashud, A.H.M. (2019), “An economic order quantity model for decaying products
with the frequency of advertisement, selling price and continuous time dependent demand
under partially backlogged shortage”, International Journal of Supply and Operations
Management, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 296-314.
He, B., Pan, W. and Yang, Y. (2019), “Joint pricing and overbooking policy in a full payment presale
mechanism of new products”, International Transactions in Operational Research, Vol. 26 No. 5,
pp. 1810-1827.
IMDS He, Y., Huang, H. and Li, D. (2020), “Inventory and pricing decisions for a dual-channel supply chain
with deteriorating products”, Operational Research, Vol. 20, pp. 1461-1503.
Hsieh, T.C., Yang, K.C., Yang, C. and Yang, C. (2013), “Multilevel latent class analysis of online
activities and e-payment behavior patterns”, Internet Research, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 204-228.
Huang, M.G. (2015), “Optimal ordering policy for perishable items in an advanced booking system
with stochastic reservation cancellations”, International Journal on Information and
Management Sciences, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 271-290.
Khouja, M. and Mehrez, A. (1996), “A multi-product constrained newsboy problem with progressive
multiple discounts”, Computers and Industrial Engineering, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 95-101.
Khouja, M. (1995), “The newsboy problem under progressive multiple discounts”, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 84 No. 2, pp. 458-466.
Kong, L., Liu, Z., Pan, Y., Xie, J. and Yang, G. (2017), “Pricing and service decision of dual-channel
operations in an O2O closed-loop supply chain”, Industrial Management and Data Systems,
Vol. 17 No. 8, pp. 1567-1588.
Li, C. and Zhang, F. (2013), “Advance demand information, price discrimination, and preorder
strategies”, Manufacturing and Service Operations Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 57-71.
Li, G., He, X., Zhou, J. and Wu, H. (2019), “Pricing replenishment and preservation technology
investment decisions for non-instantaneous deteriorating items”, Omega, Vol. 84, pp. 114-126.
Mallat, N. and Tuunainen, V.K. (2005), “Merchant adoption of mobile payment system”, Proceeding of the
International Conference on Mobile Business (ICMB’05), Sydney, Australia, July 2005, pp. 11-13.
Mashud, A.H.M., Khan, M.A., Uddin, M.S. and Islam, M.N. (2018), “A non-instantaneous inventory
model having different deterioration rates with stock and price dependent demand under
partially backlogged shortages”, Uncertain Supply Chain Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 49-64.
Mashud, A.H.M., Hasan, M.R., Wee, H.M. and Daryanto, Y. (2020), “Non-instantaneous deteriorating
inventory model under the joined effect of trade-credit, preservation technology and
advertisement policy”, Kybernetes, Vol. 69 No. 6, pp. 1645-1674, doi: 10.1108/K-05-2019-0357.
McCardle, K., Rajaram, K. and Tang, C.S. (2004), “Advance booking discount programs under retail
competition”, Management Science, Vol. 50 No. 5, pp. 701-708.
Moon, I., Yoo, D.K. and Saha, S. (2016), “The distribution-free newsboy problem with multiple
discounts and upgrades”, Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Vol. 2016, 2017253, doi: 10.
1155/2016/2017253.
Ouyang, L.Y., Wu, K.S. and Yang, C.T. (2006), “A study on an inventory model for non-instantaneous
deteriorating items with permissible delay in payments”, Computers and Industrial Engineering,
Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 637-651.
Palanivel, M. and Uthayakumar, R. (2015), “Finite horizon EOQ model for non-instantaneous
deteriorating items with price and advertisement dependent demand and partial backlogging
under inflation”, International Journal of Systems Science, Vol. 46 No. 10, pp. 1762-1773.
Pereira, V. and Costa, H.G. (2015), “A literature review on lot size with quantity discounts: 1995-2013”,
Journal of Modelling in Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 341-359.
Priporas, C., Stylos, N. and Fotiadis, A.K. (2017), “Generation Z consumers’ expectations of interactions in
smart retailing: a future agenda”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 77, pp. 374-381.
Shah, N.H., Soni, H.N. and Patel, K.A. (2013), “Optimizing inventory and marketing policy for non-
instantaneous deteriorating items with generalized type deterioration and holding cost rates”,
Omega, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 421-430.
Shaikh, A.A., Mashud, A.H.M., Uddin, M.S. and Khan, M.A. (2017), “Non-instantaneous deterioration
inventory model with price and stock dependent demand for fully backlogged shortages under
inflation”, International Journal of Business Forecasting and Marketing Intelligence, Vol. 3 No. 2,
pp. 157-164.
Subramanyam, E.S. and Kumaraswamy, S. (1981), “EOQ formula under varying marketing policies Inventory
and conditions”, AIIE Transactions, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 312-314.
management
Taleizadeh, A.A. and Sherafati, M. (2019), “A three-level supply chain with warranty services, pricing
and marketing decisions - competition and cooperation analysis”, Journal of Modelling in
with online
Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 686-716. payment
Tang, C.S., Rajaram, K. and Ou, J. (2002), “Managing demand uncertainty for short life cycle products using
advance booking discount programs”, in Guenes (Ed.), Supply Chain Management: Models,
Applications, and Research Directions, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 69-95.
glu, A. and Ou, J. (2004), “The benefits of advance booking discount
Tang, C.S., Rajaram, K., Alptekino
programs: model and analysis”, Management Science, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 465-478.
Taylor, E. (2016), “Mobile payment technologies in retail: a review of potential benefits and risks”,
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 159-177.
Tersine, R.J. and Barman, S. (1991), “Economic inventory/transport lot sizing with quantity and
freight rate discounts”, Decision Sciences, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 1171-1179.
Tiwari, S., Cardenas-Barron, L.E., Khanna, A. and Jaggi, C.K. (2016), “Impact of trade credit and
inflation on retailer’s ordering policies for non-instantaneous deteriorating items in a two-
warehouse environment”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 176, pp. 154-169.
Wang, K.H., Tsung, C.T. and Lee, Y.S. (2010), “A specific EOQ model for deteriorating items with non-
instantaneous re-useable returns”, Journal of Information and Optimization Sciences, Vol. 31
No. 3, pp. 729-748.
Weatherford, L.R. and Pfeifer, P. (1994), “The economic value of using advance booking of orders”,
Omega, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 105-111.
Wee, H.M. (1999), “Deteriorating inventory model with quantity discount, pricing and partial
backordering”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 59 Nos 1-3, pp. 511-518.
Wolner-R€oßlhuber, K., Burger, C. and Gussenbauer, J. (2013), “Internet payment behavior in Austria”,
Monetary Policy and the Economy, Vols Q3/13, pp. 29-41.
Yao, Z., Leung, S.C.H. and Lai, K.K. (2008), “Analysis of the impact of price sensitivity factors on the return
policy in coordinating supply chain”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 187, pp. 275-282.

Corresponding author
Yosef Daryanto can be contacted at: yosef.daryanto@uajy.ac.id

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com