International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

An examination of the causes for retail stockouts

Joachim C.F. Ehrenthal Wolfgang Stölzle
Article information:
To cite this document:
Joachim C.F. Ehrenthal Wolfgang Stölzle, (2013),"An examination of the causes for retail stockouts",
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 43 Iss 1 pp. 54 - 69
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09600031311293255
Downloaded on: 31 January 2016, At: 10:07 (PT)
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 52 other documents.

To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1475 times since 2013*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Younes Ettouzani, Nicola Yates, Carlos Mena, (2012),"Examining retail on shelf availability: promotional
impact and a call for research", International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management,
Vol. 42 Iss 3 pp. 213-243 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09600031211225945
Daniel Corsten, Thomas Gruen, (2003),"Desperately seeking shelf availability: an examination of the
extent, the causes, and the efforts to address retail out-of-stocks", International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, Vol. 31 Iss 12 pp. 605-617 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09590550310507731
Joachim C.F. Ehrenthal, Thomas W. Gruen, Joerg S Hofstetter, (2014),"Value attenuation and retail out-of-
stocks: A service-dominant logic perspective", International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management, Vol. 44 Iss 1/2 pp. 39-57 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-02-2013-0028

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:466119 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.


IJPDLM
43,1
54
Received 8 October 2010
Revised 18 May 2011
28 November 2011
26 May 2012
Accepted 28 May 2012
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)
International Journal of Physical
Distribution & Logistics Management
Vol. 43 No. 1, 2013
pp. 54-69
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0960-0035
DOI 10.1108/09600031311293255
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0960-0035.htm
An examination of the causes for
retail stockouts
Joachim C.F. Ehrenthal and Wolfgang Stölzle
Chair of Logistics Management, University of St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to increase our understanding of the causes for stockouts in
retailing.
Design/methodology/approach – Mixed methods study, using instore observations, interviews
with key informants in consumer goods and retailing, and a field study of stockouts and their causes in
multiple wholesale stores over two years.
Findings – The results indicate that the causes for stockouts are specific to retailer, store, category
and item. Improvements to store operations and the coordination of store delivery and shelf
replenishment are most effective in reducing stockouts. Manual audits of stockouts and their causes
benefit instore execution and provide the level of detail necessary for management to prioritize areas of
improvement.
Research limitations/implications – Future research may investigate the operational and cost
impact of incorporating demand seasonality in shelf replenishment that may lead to an improved
coordination of replenishment and demand cycles.
Practical implications – A procedure is proposed to help store managers reduce stockouts well
below the global average of 8.3 percent.
Originality/value – The paper extends the literature by providing a comprehensive set of itemized
causes of retail stockouts and reflects implications for sales-data driven research. It adds to the
emergent research that applies service-dominant logic to retail stockout research.
Keywords Stockouts, Instore logistics, Retail operations, Service-dominant logic, Retailing,
Operations management
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Stockouts are a persistent problem in retailing (Grewal and Levy, 2007). On a global
average, 8.3 percent of retail items are not available on the shelves (Gruen and Corsten,
2008). Despite the initiatives designed to improve the collaboration of retailers and
their suppliers, such as efficient consumer response (ECR)[1] and despite the increasing
use of new technologies such as radio-frequency identification (RFID) and
point-of-sales data analytics, this situation has improved little over the past decades
(Aastrup and Kotzab, 2010).
Stockouts have a direct impact on retailer financial performance, because they lead
to lost sales when shoppers decide to purchase some items elsewhere or to cancel their
shopping trip altogether. Immediate sales losses due to stockouts are estimated at
4 percent of sales (Gruen et al., 2002), which is about the same as the average 5 percent
of sales retailers spend on logistics (Sivakumar, 2010). Over time, frequent stockouts
are known to diminish the store and brand loyalty of shoppers, and consequentially
jeopardize future sales (Zinn and Liu, 2008). Further, stockouts reduce profits through a
wide array of operational issues which are difficult to measure in terms of costs, and
seldom reported (Zipkin, 2000). Examples include store staff attending shoppers who
 cannot find an out of stock item and deficient forecasts based on sales data distorted by Causes for retail
stockouts and shopper substituting behaviour. Reducing stockouts, therefore,
represents retailers with the opportunity of increasing sales and reducing cost.
stockouts
However, this also requires a detailed understanding of the causes for stockouts.
Recent surveys suggest that most retail stockouts are caused in the store. Following
the seminal work by Gruen et al. (2002), several studies have highlighted the potential
of improving store operations for the purpose of decreasing retail stockouts. The 55
studies report up to 98 percent of stockouts to be caused by defective shelf
replenishment practices, and far less being caused in the upstream supply chain, such
as a shortage of supply from a brand manufacturer (Aastrup and Kotzab, 2009
(98 percent); Gruen et al., 2002 (72 percent)). In their comprehensive review of the past
40 years of retail stockout research, Aastrup and Kotzab (2010, p. 158) conclude that:
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

[. . .] the problem of causes originating at the store-level is well known but no changes can be
observed in that matter. [. . .] The retail supply chain up to the store has been the focus during
the last decades and has been significantly optimized [. . .], a logical next step would be to
include and emphasize the in-store logistics or store operations in the analysis of retail supply
chains.
This study thus aims at contributing to the literature by detailing the factors which can
lead to retail stockouts with a particular focus on store operations. Inspired by Vargo
and Lusch (2004), it takes on a service-dominant (S-D) logic view of retail stockouts, in
which the timely interaction of retailer and supplier resources to enable the creation of
value through on-shelf availability. In this view, the retail store links the logistical
activities of the retail supply chain and those of the shopper, who can then go on to use
the value embedded in the physical goods as desired. In the case of stockouts, value
creation is obstructed or prohibited.
We apply Creswell’s (2009) mixed methods approach of collecting, analysing and
corroborating both quantitative and qualitative research within a single study, as well
as investigating the long-term effects of operational improvements in a two years field
study (Bryman, 2006; Creswell and Plano Clark, 2006). We contribute to the literature
by providing a comprehensive list of the causes for retail stockouts, conducting a
longitudinal study on the causes for retail stockouts as well as calling for research into
several issues concerning retail stockouts that were previously overlooked.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. First, we review the literature
on retail stockouts. Second, we provide a methodology section describing the research
design, data collection, and analysis in detailing the causes for retail stockouts with
special reference to store operations. Third, we report the observations from a
interviews, observations and a two years field study, which tracks causes for stockouts
for one European retailer as well as action steps taken towards stockout reduction.
Finally, we discuss our findings and conclude with opportunities for further research.

2. Literature
2.1 Shopper response to retail stockouts
Retail stockouts, i.e. items not shelved as intended, frustrate shoppers and force them
to take a number of corrective actions that are beyond the retailer’s control.
Understanding how shoppers respond to stockouts is therefore the starting point for
retailers to improve on-shelf availability (Rajaram and Tang, 2001). When shoppers are
unable to find an item that they had intended to purchase, they might switch stores,
 IJPDLM purchase substitute items (brand switch, size switch, category switch), postpone their
43,1 purchase or decide not to buy the item at all (Campo et al., 2003). Although these
responses differ in severity, each entails negative consequences for retailers. Stockouts
cause lost sales, dissatisfy shoppers, diminish store loyalty, jeopardize marketing
efforts, and obstruct sales planning, because substitution disguises true demand.
Moreover, shopper surveys reveal stockouts to currently be the most prevalent
56 annoyance to shoppers (EFMI, 2008). Shoppers spend a considerable amount of time
looking for and asking for non-available items, which disrupts the shopping experience
and ties down store staff resources.
Shopper response to stockouts has been investigated with respect to cognitive
response (e.g. perceived availability), affective response (e.g. store satisfaction),
behavioural response (e.g. brand switching) and aggregated response in terms of
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

category sales effects. Shopper response to stockouts also depends on brand-related

antecedents (e.g. brand equity), product and category-related antecedents (hedonic
level), store-related antecedents (e.g. service or price-oriented), shopper-related
antecedents (e.g. shopper age) and situational antecedents (e.g. purchase urgency).
For instance, Campo et al. (2000) develop and test a utility-based model of shopper
response to stockouts with substitution cost, transaction cost, and opportunity cost.
Using a hypothetical stockouts survey, they show that within-store substitution is
most likely when transaction cost and opportunity cost are high.
In four laboratory experiments Fitzsimmons (2000) finds that shopper response to
stockouts is driven in large part by the difficulty of making a new choice from the
available assortment and the degree of personal commitment to the alternatives. Kucuk
(2004) shows that stockout response is related to pricing and promotions. In smaller
stores, the availability of inexpensive substitutes increases item switching alternatives,
whereas instore promotion facilitates substitution behavior in larger stores. Zinn and
Liu (2001) examine the impact of shopper characteristics and situational variables on
stockout response. Using exit interviews, they show the importance of situational
variables, such as pre-shopping agenda and urgency of purchase, in stockout response.
In an online experiment Breugelmans et al. (2006) show that a retailer’s transparent
stockout communication policy decreases store switching. Van Woensel et al. (2007)
show that for perishable items, the willingness to substitute is far higher than in
non-perishable categories. In a survey assuming hypothetical stockouts, Sloot et al.
(2005) find that buyers of high-equity brands are less likely to postpone purchases, but
more likely to substitute within the same brand. They also find that shoppers looking
for items with hedonic value (e.g. offering fun and excitement rather than functional
value) are more likely to switch stores for their purchase. Recently, Zinn and Liu (2008)
show that intended and actual shopper response to stockouts differs severely,
observing a threefold increase in actual purchase cancellations after facing a stockout
compared to the shoppers’ stated intent. On average, and given different response
patterns, Gruen et al. (2002) estimate that retailers lose 4 percent of sales due to
stockouts, which for 2002 resulted in an earnings per share loss of about US$0.012 to
investors.

2.2 Previous investigations into retail stockouts

The rich knowledge on shopper response to stockouts and the consequential estimates
of stockout financial impact led to several studies that investigated the causes for
 stockouts in the retail supply chain. Stockouts occur along the entire retail supply Causes for retail
chain, which typically consists of procurement, warehousing, distribution and sales stockouts
(Levy and Grewal, 2000). The studies on retail stockouts commonly observe that
product availability deteriorates downstream towards the retail shelves. For instance,
Aastrup and Kotzab (2009) find 98 percent of stockouts to be caused at the store, Hofer
(2009) finds 91.8 percent, while McKinnon et al. (2007) find 65 percent of all stockouts to
be caused at the store. Thus, upstream problems in the supply chain, e.g. deficient 57
retailer-supplier collaboration and channel communication, pose fewer problems to
on-shelf availability. Despite most stockouts being caused in the stores, only recently
research has started looking into store-level causes (Aastrup and Kotzab, 2010).
Accordingly, this present research focuses on instore causes, but also considers
upstream (prestore) causes of stockouts.
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

From Gruen and Corsten (2008), McKinnon et al. (2007), Fernie and Grant (2008) and
Aastrup and Kotzab (2009), we collate the following synthesis of causes for retail
stockouts. We follow Aastrup and Kotzab (2010)’s retail reference model from supplier
order, warehouse delivery, cross-docking, store delivery and store shelf replenishment
processes. In the downstream order of occurrence along the retail supply chain,
starting with first tier suppliers, the main reasons for stockouts identified are as
follows. The causal categories, as collated and re-organized from the aforementioned
studies on retail stockouts serve as a basis for the remainder of this study:
.
Prestore causes are related to direct suppliers or the retailer’s distribution centre.
Direct suppliers may have fulfilment problems or delivery problems on their way
to the retailer. These may occur due to general planning and communications, for
instance for promotions. Two causal categories are related to the retailer’s central
warehouse: general warehousing and forecasting problems, such as picking
errors and system forecast errors, respectively, and ordering problems due to
inaccurate inventory, for instance. Another prestore cause for stockouts may be
unreliable transportation, such as delays caused by congested roads.
.
The instore categories of causes for stockouts include listing problems and store
ordering problems, such as erroneous manual adjustments to system orders,
followed by delivery problems from the distribution centre. Problems with
incoming goods cover deficits during the process of delivery at the store ramps,
including item damage. Store inventory problems, such as inventory-keeping,
placement problems and replenishment problems reflect the process of moving
items from the back-store to the correct space on the retail shelf. The last causal
category captures promotion-caused stockouts in the stores.

Several methods have been developed to identify and track stockouts. Generally, there
exist four methods (Gruen and Corsten, 2008). The traditional method is to manually
look for “gaps” on the shelves (Gruen et al., 2002). Fisher et al. (2000) refer to this
practice as the zero balance walk. A second method makes use of point-of-sale data or,
more specifically, scanner data. Based upon historical sales data, the latency period
between sales is taken as a gauge of whether an item is on the shelf. Stockouts may also
be identified by using inventory data. Finally, various types of technology, such as
RFID, shelf stoppers and weight or light sensors, can be used (Delen et al., 2007; Hofer,
2009).
 IJPDLM While the zero balance walk incurs labor cost, it is most useful for adding an analysis
43,1 for the causes of each stockout. If not already in place, the introduction of RFID for the
sole purpose of stockout monitoring seems unlikely for cost reasons (Wu et al., 2005).
Using scanner and inventory data to observe stockouts relies heavily on accurate
data and commonly exhibits robust results for fast-selling products only
(Papakiriakopoulos et al., 2009). As a consequence, stockouts for slow-selling items
58 remain undetected or are detected belatedly. Using inventory data entails the problem of
low levels of accuracy in the retailing context. Studies report inventory accuracy in a
retail setting to be below 50 percent (Kang and Gershwin, 2005). In a recent examination
of 370,000 inventory records from 37 stores of one retailer, DeHoratius and Raman (2008)
find 65 percent to be inaccurate. Also, inventory data may be inaccurate as to the location
of the item in the store and its condition, making the causes for stockouts hard to identify
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

(Gruen and Corsten, 2008). Above all, all technologically advanced methods for detecting
stockouts are ill suited to simultaneously identify the causes for stockouts.
As a consequence, the zero balance walk is the most suitable method for identifying
stockouts and investigating their causes. However, due to differing sales velocities and
replenishment schedules, the effectiveness of manual stockout audits depends heavily
on their frequency and timing, and on avoiding human counting errors (Gruen et al.,
2002). In addition, in order to avoid distorting the stockout data through conflicting
interests, the staff performing the audits should be independent as not to be influenced
by store management that may have an incentive to perform well in such audits
(Fernie and Grant, 2008). Some categories are prone to more stockouts because of their
logistical requirements or demand structure (McKinnon et al., 2007). Thus, product
categories with high demand uncertainty (due to impulse purchases, seasonality
effects, promotions) as well as those products with special requirements, such as
cooling, need to be taken into account when investigating the causes for stockouts
(Fernie and Grant, 2008).

2.3 S-D logic

Following Ettouzani et al. (2012), we apply S-D logic for investigating the causal factors
that lead to retail stockouts. Originally, Vargo and Lusch (2004) proposed S-D logic as
an organizing framework for the co-creation of value between multiple entities,
viewing service as the primary good that is exchange between an offering network
(e.g. the retail supply chain) and a buying network (i.e. shopper and user). S-D logic has
been applied to supply chain management (Mentzer and Gundlach, 2010; Lusch, 2011;
Tokman and Beitelspacher, 2011), discussing goods as service provision vehicles
(Lusch et al., 2010), and investigating value co-creation in supply chains (Esper et al.,
2010; Richey et al., 2010; Yazdanparast et al., 2010). Examination of service failures,
such as stockouts, from the S-D logic perspective is one of the specific research gaps
noted by Tokman and Beitelspacher (2011). Specifically, this research is concerned
with the resources necessary in the offering network, with the retailer being the prime
resource integrator, to enable the exchange of service through availability. In the S-D
logic context, two types of resources exist. Operant resources, i.e. knowledge, skills,
competencies and capabilities, become inputs to value co-creation with customers,
i.e. shoppers and their network (Lusch et al., 2010). Operant resources then act upon
“operand” resources, which must be acted upon to become beneficial, such as raw
materials. Retailers thus orchestrate supplier logistics resources as well as their own to
 exchange a service in retail stores. Ettouzani et al. (2012) argue that retailers thus Causes for retail
operate on an underlying S-D logic. Despite its recentness, S-D logic therefore seems a stockouts
promising lense for investigating retail stockouts and their causes in the store and the
upstream supply chain.

3. Detailing the causes for stockouts

3.1 Methodology 59
3.1.1 Research Phase I: interviews and field visits. In a first phase (2006-2008), we
investigated the contemporary problems confronting retail supply chain operations
that lead to stockouts through interviews and field visits. Qualitative interviews and
field visits seem to be useful in examining the distinct causes of retail stockouts
(Aastrup and Halldorsson, 2008).
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

Data was collected through multiple logistics and marketing departments to

minimize subjective judgment (Yin, 2009). We conducted semi-structured interviews
with key informants, used archival records (e.g. store staff job descriptions, planograms,
distribution schedules and central data warehouse information on shipments), and field
visits for triangulation purposes (Cooper and Schindler, 2008).
Interviews and observations were structured according to the causal categories for
stockouts introduced in Section 2.2. We selected five European retailers and their
manufacturers, as well as related logistics and information technology providers. This
approach avoids depending on individual retailers, research sites, assortments or
logistics systems, and mitigates the potentially misleading effects of idiosyncratic
shocks, such as supply bottlenecks of key suppliers. With each interview and
observation, the causes were updated, refined, reorganized and itemized within the
general categories. Logistics and information technology providers were included in
order to potentially de-bias opposing retailer and supplier views.
Data were collected from 2006 to 2008. The interviews were conducted with five
European retailers (one sales and one logistics manager for each), six brand
manufacturers (one sales and one logistics manager for each), and seven retail logistics
service and information technology providers (one manager for each). During the same
time frame, 82 store visits were conducted at two European retailers distinct from the
five retailers that were interviewed (14 and 68 visits). Store managers, but not store
staff, were aware of these visits to the two retailers. During these visits, snapshot
analyses were conducted of on-shelf availability across the entire store, and causes for
stockouts were discussed with store managers. In addition, in 2008, the final list of
causes was presented for feedback at a practitioners’ conference on retail on-shelf
availability. The discussants included logistics managers from six retailers, ten brand
manufacturers and managers from 12 retail logistics service and information
technology providers.
3.1.2 Research Phase II: field study. In a second phase (2008-2009), we further
examine the causal factors for retail stockouts in a succession of field studies at four
stores of a single retailer. Over a two years period, ten in-depth stockout audits were
carried out, simultaneously tracking stockouts and identifying their causes.
Applying field study research seems to be appropriate for our objective of deepening
the current understanding of retail stockouts. Most retailers do not track store-specific
causes of stockouts (Aastrup and Kotzab, 2010). In such cases, induction from field
studies is regarded as a suitable approach (Ellram, 1996; Spens and Kovacs, 2006).
 IJPDLM Multiple field studies were conducted for the purpose of increasing the robustness of
43,1 results (Herriott and Firestone, 1983; Yin, 2009). The field studies follow replication logic
(Eisenhardt, 1989) to strengthen external validity, and to ensure that each single field
study within the multi-field-study setting yields comparable results (Yin, 2009). We
chose a single retailer in order to hold corporate functions and services, such as
marketing, central warehousing, information technology and store delivery, constant for
60 all stores under investigation.
Within our studies, various sources of quantitative and qualitative information
were collated, so as to facilitate the in-depth exploration of the research site and to
provide rich knowledge in the specific context (Arlbjørn and Halldorsson, 2001;
Creswell, 2009; Mangan et al., 2005). Ancillary information from the retailer’s data
warehouse was used to confirm and extend the analysis. Other sources of information
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

included workshops and interviews with company executives, supply chain managers
and store management, as typical elements of field study research.
The retailer was interested in analysing the reasons for stockouts, as it had recently
introduced a new automated store ordering system. Despite the system’s robust
ordering results compared to manual store ordering, stockouts occurred frequently and
customers complained. While the researchers participated in meetings and discussed
our findings with company executives, the researchers were not actively involved in
the decision-making process. The researchers’ role was to provide knowledge,
methodology and independent data analysis.
The field studies were carried out as follows. Together, with retail management, the
stores and items for investigation were selected. The stores were selected as to represent
a newly built store, a renovated store, an older store and one store with two floor levels.
A representative sample of items was selected as to cover the 20 percent highest selling
items by revenue for each category. In addition, the items under investigation were
those equipped with a barcode to be able to cross-check findings with system data. This
meant dropping several items, in the produce category. The resulting sample sizes were
495, 490, 493 and 473 items per day. The sample size differs due to de-listings over the
two years period. To avoid distortion in our results, sample-size effects were controlled
in the analysis. In addition to detecting stockouts, if fewer than six units of a sample
item were on the shelf, the current inventory level was noted.
Prior to the audits, staff was trained to identify stockouts and complete relevant
documentation, and educated in identifying causes for stockouts with store managers
in structured interviews, resulting in the identification of a unique cause for each
stockout. A stockout was noted if an item’s predefined and labelled shelf space was
empty, the item was not ready or fit for sale (damaged, etc.), or it was difficult to grasp
or hidden (e.g. blocked by roll cages). Independent staff carried out the first two audits,
while the retailer’s inventory control staff carried out the remaining audits. No
systematic errors in stockout detection were observed in several unannounced on-site
visits to monitor all audit staff. Store managers were aware of the presence of the audit
teams, but store staff was not informed as to the exact purpose of the audit in order to
prevent deviations from standard practice.
Following each audit day, the audit staff interviewed store managers to assign a
cause to each individual stockout. Audit staff documented the interview results and
passed them on to headquarters every night to prevent loss of data. The information
on stockouts and their causes was then aggregated and analyzed each night.
 Store managements’ assessments of causes were validated at the retailers’ Causes for retail
headquarters. For instance, if a stockout was attributed to the cause “no delivery by stockouts
supplier”, this information was cross-checked with receipt of goods information at the
distribution center. The store manager’s assessment was altered if necessary. Further,
headquarters examined store ordering for anomalies during the audits that might have
occurred from advancing shipments or increasing order quantities.
Audits were carried out over two weeks in order to capture day-of-the-week 61
effects. The first two audits lasted 14 consecutive working days, and the subsequent
audits lasted 12 days, i.e. two weeks, with the stores being closed on Sundays.
Sufficiently consistent patterns of stockouts were identified after 12 days. This
yielded a total of 61,119 observations, more than 6,000 observation points per store
and audit. The audits were scheduled well after major replenishments and at a time
of day where the store sees less customer traffic as to prevent disruptions to
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

shoppers. The audit time was 1-3 p.m., since store sales usually peak around 12 p.m.,
with substantially fewer customers shopping after 3 p.m. Table I summarizes the
process of preparing the audits, carrying out the audits, and changing behaviour
according to the results.
The result was a list of all stockouts per item and their causes during a specific day.
During the audits, several action steps were taken by the retailer to eliminate the
causes for stockouts. These are reported in the results section.

3.2 Results
In the interviews and field visits, we find that the causes for stockouts are specific to
retailer, store, category and item. The causes identified at the store-level include issues
with listing, ordering, delivery, handling, shelf replenishment, placement, and dealing
with promotions. At the level of the retail distribution center and with direct suppliers,
the causes identified were related to delivery, ordering, and handling, the latter not
applying to direct suppliers.
Table II provides a detailed list of the causes for stockouts as identified in the
interviews and field visits, building on the more general findings collated from the
literature in Section 2.2. The issues marked with an asterisk refer to causes that may
occur in automated store ordering as well as manual adjustments therein. For instance,
an order may not be placed because of an ordering system failure or because the order

Preparation Audit Analysis and action

Development of causes Perform audits Analyse data by store, category,

list Collect and store data immediately group results by cause and financial
Development of Perform consistency checks on impact
interview forms results with existing databases Prioritize and decide on action steps
Selection of items to Monitor audit staff Repeat audit to monitor
investigate Monitor store ordering and implementation success
Selection of stores and replenishment behavior
time frame
Creation of raw data Table I.
base An overview of the
Audit staff training overall stockout audit
Involvement of key staff procedure
 IJPDLM
43,1 Location Issue Itemized causes for stockouts

Store Listing Item not listed or delisted; item re-launch; error in master dataa
Ordering Inaccurate inventory management; no order placeda; late ordera; wrong
quantity ordera; minimum order quantity not meta; minimum order
value not meta; inaccurate forecast of standard itemsa; inaccurate
62 system reorder level; order transmission problemsa; manual ordering
mistake, such as transposed digits; ordering system error; miscellaneous
other problems
Delivery Item not delivered; inaccurate consignment; delivery delay; delivery of
wrong quantities; item damage during delivery; wrong item
arrangement on pallets
Receipt Ramps occupied; wrong shipment received; poor quality shipment
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

discovered during receipt; inappropriate handling; delay in quality

Table II.
A comprehensive list of
causes for retail stockouts
control; absence of staff; problems with handheld scanners and other
such devices for inventory control; miscellaneous other problems
Handling Inaccurate inventory records; item damage; sell-by date expired;
inappropriate handling; shrinkage; misplaced item; inventory
differences
Shelf Staff busy elsewhere; item not trackable (store and backroom); staff did
replenishment not notice stockout; staff did not report stockout; items still in goods-
received; item not replenished by external staff (rag jobber); item not in
rack (in case of racks); secondary packaging not removed
Placement Secondary placement; stockout item substituted by other item;
placement not compliant to planogram; insufficient shelf space; featured
item differs from standard item
Promotions Inaccurate forecast of promoted itema; promotional shelf empty/not
replenished; item not delivered (inaccurate consignment and inaccurate
delivery from the distribution center or a direct supplier)
Distribution Delivery Item damage during transportation from supplier
center Ordering Inaccurate forecast of standard itema; inaccurate forecast of promotional
itemsa; order transmission problems to suppliera; late order at suppliera;
supplier minimum order quantity not meta; supplier minimum order
value not meta; order placed for next delivery
Handling Sell-by date expired; inaccurate inventory records; item damage;
shrinkage; problems with supplier integration
Direct Delivery Delivery delay; item damage
supplier Ordering Inaccurate forecast of standard itema; inaccurate forecast of promotional
itemsa; order transmission problems to direct suppliera; late order at
direct suppliera; direct supplier minimum order quantity not meta; direct
supplier minimum order value not meta
Note: aOccurs both with automated store ordering and manual adjustments therein

was manually overwritten by store management, at retailer headquarters, or at the

supplier, respectively. This distinction is important because it hints at either an IT or a
management problem and thus points towards different solutions.
Using this list of itemized causes for stockouts, the field study results for the test
are reported in the following. The average stockout level for the first audit (early 2008)
was 2.15 percent[2]. Furthermore, the stockout levels varied within the four
categories of fresh foods (2.9 percent), food (1.1 percent), near-food[3] (0.5 percent)
 and non-food (4.4 percent). While they were fairly stable at around 2.2 percent from Causes for retail
Monday to Wednesday, the levels fell to 1.8 percent on Thursday and Friday, and stockouts
finally rose on Saturday to 2.83 percent. The main problems that lead to stockouts were
fulfilment problems by the direct suppliers with 42.5 percent, along with store ordering
problems and replenishment problems, each of which accounted for 25.6 percent of the
stockouts. The products with the highest stockout levels are not necessarily those
causing the highest losses. The turnover losses due to non-availability were highest in 63
the fresh foods category as compared to average weekly sales in the previous weeks.
Based on these results, two logistics improvement projects to eliminate instore and
prestore causes of stockouts with the highest sales impact were initiated. The first
project concerned instore organization and shelf replenishment so as to take account of
deficient shelf replenishment. The retailer chose to target instore problems first, since
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

implementation lies within the company’s control. The instore staffs, who were
previously assigned jobs on a weekly basis, were divided into logistics and sales staff.
Replenishment and return activities were bundled according to assortment and
scheduled on a monthly basis, according to three category zones within each market.
Each zone was replenished, and received special attention (e.g. check-ups) by the store
logistics staff on predefined days of the week. Sales staff was exempt from logistics
activities, so that they could concentrate on advising customers and operating checkouts.
The goal was to improve the flow of goods and simplify tasks for store personnel.
The aim of the second project was to target prestore causes for stockouts,
specifically fulfilment problems by direct suppliers. Since this mostly concerned
delivery times of direct shipments that did not match store replenishment schedules,
new order and delivery cycles were established to enable more timely fulfilment.
70 suppliers collaborated and agreed to make the desired changes to their delivery
schedules. In tandem, the wholesaler’s distribution centre changed deliveries to match
store-specific shelf replenishment. About 90 percent of the store’s inventory now
arrives just before a predefined zone is to be replenished.
Directly after implementing the aforementioned projects, in the summer of 2008, the
stockout rates in the store increased from 2.15 to 2.41 percent. The stockout rates
increased in the categories of fresh food (þ 0.6 percent), food (þ 0.8 percent) and
near-food (þ 0.5 percent), but decreased in the non-food category (2 1.5 percent). The
stockout rates peaked on Tuesday (3.3 percent), but remained between 2 and 2.2 percent
for the rest of the week. The increase in stockouts appeared due to store management
issues; most stockouts are caused by deficient manual store ordering (66.2 percent).
Project implementation, however, was successful. Fulfilment problems ceased to
induce stockouts and shelf replenishment problems were reduced to 10.6 percent.
Half a year on, in early 2009, the average stockout level in the store was 1.81 percent.
Again, non-food (3.3 percent) and fresh products (2.33 percent) were more often out of
stock than the other categories. On Mondays, the stockout rates were slightly higher
(2.63 percent), and on Tuesdays and Wednesdays (1.3-1.4 percent) they fell, which
reflects both the demand cycle over the week as well as the fact that there are no
deliveries on Sundays. The causal category to which most stockouts could be
attributed to was deficient store ordering (43 percent), followed by replenishment
problems (23 percent).
In late 2009, the average rate of stockouts dropped from 1.81 to 0.98 percent.
Specifically, the stockouts declined in all four product categories: fresh food
 IJPDLM (2 2.17 percent), food (2 0.62 percent), near-food (2 0.22 percent) and non-food
43,1 (2 1.79 percent). However, the stockouts still peaked on Mondays (2.31 percent), though
they fell sharply for the rest of the week.

4. Discussion and conclusions

Stockouts are frequently reported as a large problem for retailers. Considering the
64 growth of online retailers, and readily available logistics services such as next-day
delivery, providing high on-shelf availability is vital to the success of brick-and-mortar
retailers. In this research, the causes for stockouts were investigated. Our results
indicate that the causes for stockouts are specific to retailer, store, category and item.
We shed light on the causes for stockouts in-stores and provide an itemized list of
stockouts. We observe that improvements to store operations and the coordination of
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

store delivery and shelf replenishment are most effective for improving on-shelf
availability. Even for a retailer with a sophisticated store ordering system and data
warehouse, manual stockout audits provided useful in lowering stockout levels over a
period of two years. From the field study, we identify store organization, and the
coordinating store delivery and shelf replenishment as key drivers for reducing
stockout levels. The retailer takes on the role as the prime resource integrator, with
the store being central to the improvement projects, and suppliers taking on the role
of supporting network partners and is treated by the retailer as an operand resource,
i.e. acted upon rather than actively involved in the value creation process.
We contribute to the literature in several ways. First, the knowledge of the logistical
causes for stockouts was extended by conducting instore observations and interviews.
Only by determining the precise extent of stockouts in the store and understanding the
deficits in the supply chain, can retailers successfully reduce stockout levels. Previously,
research in this area has largely been conceptual in nature and stockout levels and
stockout causes have been studied independently. Further, previous studies provided
snapshots of three- to four-day observations and interviews (Fernie and Grant, 2008;
Aastrup and Kotzab, 2009). This is in contrast to the marketing research on shopper
response to stockouts. For instance, Zinn and Liu (2008) conduct repeat interviews with
shoppers 30 days after stockout incidents to compare purchase intent and actual
behaviour, accounting for stockout encounters in between interviews. Paralleling the
efforts in marketing research to investigate long-run effects of stockouts on shopper
response, we studied the long-run effects of stockout monitoring and retail operations.
Second, we provide a procedure to help retailers to reduce stockouts. While previous
studies have contributed to understanding where in the supply chain stockouts occur,
research has not developed a procedure to reduce stockouts (Trautrims et al., 2009). For
validation, stockouts were studied across an entire assortment and over a period of two
years, which improves the generalizability of the results obtained. Manual audits
identify the extent of stockouts in the store and attribute a cause to each stockout. The
information gathered is triangulated, cross-checking for internal consistency with retail
data warehouse information. This research therefore adds new depth to the instore
causes and shows solution mechanisms, both on the store-level and in the supply chain.
However, the results of the research conducted here differ from previous research
with respect to the overall level of stockouts identified and stockouts caused by
promotions. In the field study, stockout levels are substantially lower than those of the
stockouts studied in other contexts (0.98 percent compared to a global average
 of 8.3 percent). Similarly different, promotion-related causes for stockouts were Causes for retail
negligible. This is in contrast to several studies report to be up to twice the rate stockouts
compared to non-promoted items (Gruen and Corsten, 2008). This indicates that the
causes of stockouts are likely to be retailer and store-specific. Moreover, this research
also added evidence to the growing body of logistics research that derives in-depth
knowledge from a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches to solving
persistent logistical problems (Aastrup and Halldorsson, 2008), and provides guidance 65
to researchers on conducting field studies at the retail-shelf level.
The results also have implications for the study of retail demand and retail supply
chains when using sales data. As starting points of supply chains, capturing customer
demand at the retail shelf is vital to demand and distribution management. Persistent
stockouts distort demand in an unobservable way. Reducing stockouts improves the
data accuracy within the supply chains. Acknowledging that stockouts are a persistent
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

problem in retailing, and that retailing is the starting point of many supply chains,
researchers need to be aware of the logistical causes that may distort their data. Any
research using retail sales data may be prone to distortions due to stockouts. As
shown, these can in some cases not be observed from inventory systems or other
sources readily available to researchers. To account for this problem, researchers could
employ the procedure outlined to assess the extent to which the occurrence of stockouts
in their data distorts results. We are unaware of research testing their sales data for
stockout-based distortions. Developing a control measure for stockout-induced data
distortions may be a starting point for addressing this issue, and would benefit both
the marketing and operations disciplines. Besides, sufficient knowledge of the extent of
stockouts, this would include estimates of lost sales as well as estimates for
substitution behaviour and other effects, such as non-purchases of complementary
purchases and is subject to further research.
The research results have several implications for retail management. Most
importantly, they demonstrate that retailers can reduce stockouts to levels far below
the global average of 8.3 percent by focusing on item-level causes and store-level
solutions. The procedure presented here provides clear guidelines to managers on how
to identify stockouts and their causes. The resulting information allows retail
managers to prioritize their efforts at reducing stockouts. The procedure requires no
investment in technology and can be integrated into routine inventory checks at low
cost. The research indicates that:
.
identifying stockouts and their causes manually;
.
assigning clear logistics roles and responsibilities to store staff; and
.
scheduling deliveries for shelf replenishment leads to improvements in on-shelf
availability.

Our research has several limitations, which provide avenues for further research on
retail stockouts. First, a continuous set of data is not considered; this could be achieved
by incorporating automated techniques for stockout detection into our procedure
(Papakiriakopoulos et al., 2009). In a similar vein, comparative studies from other
retailers may add further insight into the role of the store in retail stockout management.
Second, the concern here is with mitigating stockouts, rather than finding optimal levels
of on-shelf availability. Instead of attempting to provide maximal on-shelf availability,
retail research could focus on providing on-shelf availability as justified by demand.
 IJPDLM To date, such an approach has been used only in Lee (2004), who describes how a
43,1 Japanese retailer successfully adapts her assortment of goods during the day and
deliberately initiates a stockout when an item is low in demand. This shopper-focused
approach to supply-demand integration may be studied from a S-D logic perspective,
investigating the operational and cost impact of incorporating demand seasonality
in inventory control and shelf replenishment practices. Third, future research
66 could investigate why the global average of retail stockouts has remained constant
over the last 40 years (Aastrup and Kotzab, 2010). This research suggests that retailer
operant resources (e.g. stockout detection capabilities) and channel power (e.g. supplier
involvement) may play key roles in this stagnation.

Notes
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

1. ECR suggests the functional integration of retailers and manufacturers in category

management, continuous replenishment programs (CRP), cross docking, collaborative
planning, forecasting and replenishment (CPFR), efficient unit load (EUL), and standards for
item identification and communication (Aastrup et al., 2008).
2. We limit the reporting to one store. The other stores exhibited structurally similar results.
The highest stockout rate was measured in the fresh foods category in the older store
(16 percent). All audits have in common that shelf replenishment was deficient, and that
manual adjustments of automated store ordering lead to frequent stockouts. Over all audits,
51.5-94 percent of stockouts were caused on the store level.
3. Near food includes all sorts of categories, such as personal care, pharmaceuticals, and
kitchenware.

References
Aastrup, J. and Halldorsson, A. (2008), “Epistemological roles of case studies in logistics”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 38 No. 10,
pp. 746-63.
Aastrup, J. and Kotzab, H. (2009), “Analyzing out-of-stock in independent grocery stores – an
empirical study”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 37 No. 9,
pp. 765-89.
Aastrup, J. and Kotzab, H. (2010), “Forty years of out-of-stock research – and shelves are still
empty”, International Review of Retail, Distribution & Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 1,
pp. 147-64.
Aastrup, J., Kotzab, H., Grant, D.B., Teller, C. and Bjerre, M. (2008), “A model for structuring
efficient consumer response measures”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, Vol. 36 No. 8, pp. 590-606.
Arlbjørn, J.S. and Halldorsson, A. (2001), “Logistics knowledge creation: reflections on content,
context and processes”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 22-40.
Breugelmans, E., Campo, K. and Gijsbrechts, E. (2006), “Opportunities for active stock-out
management in online stores: the impact of the stock-out policy on online stock-out
reactions”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 82 No. 3, pp. 215-28.
Bryman, A. (2006), “Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done?”,
Qualitative Research, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 97-113.
Campo, K., Gijsbrechts, E. and Nisol, P. (2000), “Towards understanding consumer response to
stock-outs”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 76 No. 2, pp. 219-42.
 Campo, K., Gijsbrechts, E. and Nisol, P. (2003), “The impact of retailer stockouts on whether, how Causes for retail
much, and what to buy”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 3,
pp. 273-86. stockouts
Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P.S. (2008), Business Research Methods, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Creswell, J.W. (2009), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches,
Sage, London.
Creswell, J.W. and Plano Clark, V.L. (2006), Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 67
Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
DeHoratius, N. and Raman, A. (2008), “Inventory record inaccuracy: an empirical analysis”,
Management Science, Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 627-41.
Delen, D., Hardgrave, B.C. and Sharda, R. (2007), “RFID for better supply-chain management
through enhanced information visibility”, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 16
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

No. 5, pp. 613-24.

Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building theory from case study research”, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-50.
Ellram, L.M. (1996), “The use of the case study method in logistics research”, Journal of Business
Logistics, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 93-138.
EMFI (2008), Consumer Trends, EMFI, Leusden.
Esper, T.L., Ellinger, A.E., Stank, T.P., Flint, D.J. and Moon, M. (2010), “Demand and supply
integration: a conceptual framework of value-creation through knowledge management”,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 5-18.
Ettouzani, Y., Yates, N. and Mena, C. (2012), “Examining retail on shelf availability: promotional
impact and a call for research”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 213-43.
Fernie, J. and Grant, D.B. (2008), “On-shelf availability: the case of a UK grocery retailer”,
The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 293-308.
Fisher, M.L., Raman, A. and McClelland, A.S. (2000), “Rocket science retailing is almost here: are
you ready?”, Harvard Business Review, July-August, pp. 115-24.
Fitzsimmons, G.J. (2000), “Consumer response to stockouts”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 249-66.
Grewal, D. and Levy, M. (2007), “Retailing research: past, present, and future”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 83 No. 4, pp. 447-64.
Gruen, T.W. and Corsten, D. (2008), A Comprehensive Guide to Retail Out-of-Stock Reduction in
the Fast-Moving Consumer Goods Industry, Grocery Manufacturers of America,
Washington, DC.
Gruen, T.W., Corsten, D. and Bharadwaj, S. (2002), Retail Out-of-Stock: A Worldwide
Examination of Extent, Causes, and Consumer Response, Grocery Manufacturer of
America, Washington, DC.
Herriott, R.E. and Firestone, W.A. (1983), “Multisite qualitative research: optimizing description
and generalizability”, Education Researcher, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 14-19.
Hofer, F. (2009), Management der Filiallogistik im Lebensmitteleinzelhandel:
Gestaltungsempfehlungen zur Vermeidung von Out-of-Stocks, Gabler, Wiesbaden.
Kang, Y. and Gershwin, S.B. (2005), “Information inaccuracy in inventory systems: stock loss
and stockout”, IIE Transactions, Vol. 37 No. 9, pp. 843-59.
Kucuk, S.U. (2004), “Reducing the out-of-stock costs in a developing retailing sector”, Journal of
International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 75-104.
 IJPDLM Lee, H. (2004), “The triple-A supply chain”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 82 No. 10, pp. 102-12.
43,1 Levy, M. and Grewal, D. (2000), “Supply chain management in networked economy”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 76 No. 4, pp. 415-29.
Lusch, R.F. (2011), “Reframing supply chain management: a service-dominant logic perspective”,
Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 14-18.
Lusch, R.F., Vargo, S.L. and Tanniru, M. (2010), “Service, value networks and learning”, Journal
68 of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 19-31.
McKinnon, A.C., Mendes, D. and Nabateh, M. (2007), “In-store logistics: an analysis of on-shelf
availability and stockout response for three product groups”, International Journal of
Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 251-68.
Mangan, J., Lalwani, C. and Gardner, B. (2005), “Combining qualitative and quantitative
methodologies in logistics research”, International Journal of Logistics Management,
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

Vol. 34 No. 7, pp. 565-78.

Mentzer, J. and Gundlach, G. (2010), “Exploring the relationship between marketing and supply
chain management: introduction to the special issue”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 1-4.
Papakiriakopoulos, D., Pramatari, K. and Doukidis, G. (2009), “A decision support system for
detecting products missing from the shelf based on heuristic rules”, Decision Support
Systems, Vol. 46, pp. 685-94.
Rajaram, K. and Tang, C.S. (2001), “The impact of product substitution on retail merchandising”,
European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 135 No. 3, pp. 582-601.
Richey, G.R., Tokman, M. and Dalela, V. (2010), “Examining collaborative supply chain service
technologies: a study of intensity, relationships, and resources”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 71-89.
Sivakumar, N. (2010), Strategic Issues for Retail CEOs, PricewaterhouseCoopers, London.
Sloot, L.M., Verhoef, P.C. and Franses, P.H. (2005), “The impact of brand equity and the hedonic
level of products on consumer stock-out reactions”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 81 No. 1,
pp. 15-34.
Spens, K.M. and Kovacs, G. (2006), “A content analysis of research approaches in logistics
research”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 36
No. 5, pp. 374-90.
Tokman, M. and Beitelspacher, L.S. (2011), “Supply chain networks and service-dominant logic:
suggestions for future research”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management, Vol. 41 No. 7, pp. 717-26.
Trautrims, A., Grant, D.B., Fernie, J. and Harrison, T. (2009), “Optimizing on-shelf availability for
customer service and profit”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 231-47.
Van Woensel, T. and Van Donselaar, K. (2007), “Consumer responses to shelf out-of-stocks of
perishable products”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management, Vol. 37 No. 9, pp. 704-18.
Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R.F. (2004), “Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Wu, N.C., Nystrom, M.A., Lin, T.R. and Yu, H.C. (2005), “Challenges to global RFID adoption”,
Technovation, Vol. 26, pp. 1317-23.
Yazdanparast, A., Manuj, I. and Swartz, S.M. (2010), “Co-creating logistics value:
a service-dominant logic perspective”, International Journal of Logistics Management,
Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 375-403.
 Yin, R.K. (2009), Case Study Research, Design and Methods, Sage, Newbury Park, CA. Causes for retail
Zinn, W. and Liu, P.C. (2001), “Consumer response to retail stockouts”, Journal of Business stockouts
Logistics, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 49-71.
Zinn, W. and Liu, P.C. (2008), “A comparison of actual and intended consumer behavior in
response to retail stockouts”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 141-59.
Zipkin, P.H. (2000), Foundations of Inventory Management, McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA.
69
About the authors
Joachim C.F. Ehrenthal is a Doctoral Student at the Chair of Logistics Management, University of
St Gallen, Switzerland. He holds a MSc in Business Administration from the University of
Mannheim, Germany. His research is focused on measuring and improving the return on logistics
investment. His current research investigates the effects of applying service-dominant logic to
retail operations. Joachim C.F. Ehrenthal is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

joachim.ehrenthal@unisg.ch
Professor Dr Wolfgang Stölzle is the Director of the Chair of Logistics Management at
the University of St Gallen, Switzerland since autumn 2004. He is also Director of the
extra-occupational diploma program in logistics management. His field of study contains
logistics, supply chain management, transportation management, controlling as well as
procurement management.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
 This article has been cited by:

1. Goran Avlijas, Ana Simicevic, Radoslav Avlijas, Marijana Prodanovic. 2015. Measuring the impact
of stock-keeping unit attributes on retail stock-out performance. Operations Management Research 8,
131-141. [CrossRef]
2. Michael G. Sternbeck. 2015. A store-oriented approach to determine order packaging quantities in grocery
retailing. Journal of Business Economics 85, 569-596. [CrossRef]
3. Nadjib Brahimi, Tarik Aouam. 2015. Multi-item production routing problem with backordering: a MILP
approach. International Journal of Production Research 1-18. [CrossRef]
4. Annika Alftan, Riikka Kaipia, Lauri Loikkanen, Karen Spens. 2015. Centralised grocery supply chain
planning: improved exception management. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management 45:3, 237-259. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
5. Manfredi Bruccoleri, Salvatore Cannella, Giulia La Porta. 2014. Inventory record inaccuracy in supply
Downloaded by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY At 10:07 31 January 2016 (PT)

chains: the role of workers’ behavior. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management
44:10, 796-819. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
6. Michael G. Sternbeck, Heinrich Kuhn. 2014. An integrative approach to determine store delivery patterns
in grocery retailing. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 70, 205-224.
[CrossRef]
7. Bernadette Förster, Jonas Keller, Heiko A. von der Gracht, Inga-Lena Darkow. 2014. Delphi-based
strategic issue management: crafting consumer goods supply chain strategy. International Journal of
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 44:5, 373-391. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
8. Joachim C.F. Ehrenthal, Thomas W. Gruen, Joerg S Hofstetter. 2014. Value attenuation and retail out-
of-stocks. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 44:1/2, 39-57. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]