In Par Al Fulfilment

TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS AND PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS
FOR “THE LAST MILE DELIVERY” SUPPLY CHAIN
by
Praveen Kumar Mishra, MCA, MBA (IT)
DISSERTATION
Presented to the Swiss School of Business and Management Geneva
In Par�al Fulfilment
Of the Requirements
For the Degree
DOCTOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
SWISS SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT GENEVA
April, 2024
by
Praveen Kumar Mishra
APPROVED BY
__________________________________________
<Chair’s Name, Degree>, Chair
RECEIVED/APPROVED BY:
SSBM Representa�ve
Dedica�on
With the start of my thesis document, I would like to step back and ponder over the exciting
journey of my Global Doctor of Business Administration (GDBA) program, which I started
in Jun’22 to till now while I am writing this document. The journey has been very exciting
– learning – self-actualizing and I want to explicitly dedicate my final thesis to my father
and my wife who played a very important role in motivating me to undertake this GDBA
program alongside my stringent and highly demanding professional life.
It was always a desire of my father to see me succeed in life and he is a firm believer that
a good education always provide us a platform to grow. Since he himself could not pursue
his post-graduation in Economics (that being his favorite subject in 1960’s), he always is
wanting me to get educated as much as I can and provides all the psychological support he
can give.
The support from my wife had been immense, she is a Masters in Computers and Masters
in Chemistry have been very participative in this DBA journey. She has always lent ears
to hear my theory and also provide inputs as she too remains one of the consumers of my
theory which is getting proved in this thesis. My wife also ensured that I get the space
needed for me to critically think – analyze – document the research stages which has finally
gotten converged to my final thesis document of GDBA program.
I thank both my father and my wife as they had to postpone many of their plans just because
of my tight schedule on this DBA journey and it is their motivations that gave me enough
will-power to bring my DBA journey to this level.

Acknowledgements
During my DBA journey I came across many people who provided their guidance with the
sole intent of assisting me to successfully complete my DBA program. The most important
person is my mentor, Dr. Sasa Petar (PhD), who not only made me comfortable but also
ensured that I enjoyed this journey along with my other personal & professional
commitments. His clarity on the subject ensured that I am doing the research in the right
direction with the right cause and with the intention to get the right results which could
benefit industries anytime in future. His commitment to validate my research topic,
research contents and direction of research is what I am proud of, and this document is an
output of his efforts taken for me to accomplish my DBA journey.
I also would like to acknowledge my fellow DBA program colleagues who shared their
experiences of their journey and the approaches they adhered to overcome their challenges
or obstacles. Such interactions over the group helped me to keep aligning my thoughts and
contents to achieve my goals.
Lastly, I would also like to acknowledge my colleagues in Volkswagen Group IT as they
took interest in my research topics and provided their valuable suggestions and input.
iv
ABSTRACT

2024
Disserta�on Chair: <Chair’s Name>
E-commerce retail sales have been growing year on year (YOY), marking a cultural mindset change
in purchaser and making them sway to online purchases as compared to traditional window
shopping. This mindset took a great faith of leap, with Covid-19, directly impacting lives and
businesses across the globe. Change in mindset gave way to unique demands, like expecting
delivery in same day or in next 45 minutes as a new normal expectation. These demands led
researchers, supply chain domain experts, logistics & delivery partners as well as e-commerce
vendors to ponder over ways by which business processes could be made more agile – simpler –
faster with additional advantages of shelving out business process inefficiencies as well as
reducing the cost of operations by bringing business very near to consumer. This research was an
attempt to study how co-ownership/ co-sharing of infra resources and technology embracing can
help e-commerce vendors become more agile and can meet the expectations of end consumers
for a delivery model to optimize from 1 week to 1 day to 45 minutes. The research used Mixed
Method research approach where-by quantitative and qualitative data was collected from
different targeted audiences. Theoretical framework of e-business competitiveness was used to
derive a web-based online survey targeted to e-consumers, e-commerce vendors, logistics and
delivery partners including detailed interviews of selected respondents.
The findings of the research indicate that consumers at large are now inclined to have daily need
products from online shopping, and they are willing to pay extra if the delivery time is quick and
is adhering to quality standards. At the same time, the e-commerce vendors and logistics partners
are willing to adopt or fund technology adoption and innovation for supporting quick delivery to
v
customers. It has also been discovered from the data that there are small players in the business
too who cannot afford to keep pace with technology changes, but they are willing to piggy ride
some big players and contribute to the success of quick e-commerce. This research study will be
helpful for e-commerce vendors as well as partners in e-commerce delivery value chain.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables ............................................................................................................... xvi

List of Figures ............................................................................................................. xvii
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................ 1

1.2 Research Problem ............................................................................... 3
1.3 Purpose of Research ........................................................................... 4
1.4 Significance of the Study .................................................................... 5
1.5 Research Questions ............................................................................ 6
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................................. 8
2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................ 8

2.2 Theory: Adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI) – Machine
Learning (ML) – Intelligent Analytics (IA) – Robotics for
succeeding ’30-minutes delivery model.’................................................ 11
2.2.1 Reasoned Action: Usage of AI-ML & IIOT technology to
enable quick and efficient complex solutions. ......................................... 12
2.2.2 Reasoned Action: Usage of Intelligent Analytics for decision
insights ................................................................................................... 15
2.2.3 Reasoned Action: Usage of Robotics and autonomous
vehicles for minimizing human efforts for complex deliveries. ............... 17
2.3 Theory: Hybrid model of co-sourcing and co-ownership
between e-commerce vendor – 3PLs – Last Mile Delivery players
must need for ‘30-min delivery model.’ .................................................. 20
2.3.1 Reasoned Action: Usage of Robotics and autonomous
vehicles for minimizing human efforts for complex deliveries. ............... 20
2.3.2 Reasoned Action: Co-ownership of data between different
sourcing vendors. ................................................................................... 22
2.3.3 Reasoned Action: Co-owned or Co-sourced delivery partners. ....... 23
2.4 Disagreements to above theory ......................................................... 24
2.5 Human Culture as Important Factor to Technology Adoption ........... 25
2.6 Human Culture as Important Factor to Process Adoption .................. 26
2.5 Summary .......................................................................................... 27
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY .............................................................................. 29
3.1 Overview of the Research Problem ................................................... 29

3.2 Operationalization of Theoretical Constructs .................................... 31
3.2.1 Objectivity/ Concept ...................................................................... 31
3.2.2 Measurable KPIs and its indicators ................................................ 32
3.2.3 Reliability ...................................................................................... 33
vii
3.3 Research Purpose and Questions....................................................... 34
3.3.1 Research Purpose........................................................................... 34
3.3.2 Research Questions........................................................................ 35
3.4 Research Design ............................................................................... 74
3.5 Population and Sample ..................................................................... 75
3.6 Participant Selection ......................................................................... 78
3.7 Instrumentation ................................................................................ 79
3.8 Data Collection Procedures............................................................... 81
3.9 Data Analysis ................................................................................... 82
3.10 Research Design Limitations .......................................................... 83
3.11 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 84
CHAPTER IV: RESULTS ........................................................................................... 86
4.1 Research questions for online buyers ................................................ 89

4.1.1 Research Question One: What is your age group? .......................... 89
4.1.2 Research Question Two: Where do you live? ................................. 90
4.1.3 Research Question Three: Which city and state you live in? .......... 91
4.1.4 Research Question Four: What is your job sector? ......................... 92
4.1.5 Research Question Five: Do you use e-commerce for online
purchases? .............................................................................................. 93
4.1.6 Research Question Six: What is your average online
purchase? ............................................................................................... 94
4.1.7 Research Question Seven: Which e-commerce platform(s) do
you use? ................................................................................................. 94
4.1.8 Research Question Eight: What type of products do you
purchase from e-commerce vendors? ...................................................... 95
4.1.9 Research Question Nine: What are the reasons you would
leave an e-commerce vendor?................................................................. 96
4.1.10 Research Question Ten: What are the reasons you prefer
online shopping? .................................................................................... 97
4.1.11 Research Question Eleven: If your e-commerce vendor
provided you the purchased product in 10 min, will you be
excited? .................................................................................................. 98
4.1.12 Research Question Twelve: If you had been interested in 10
min delivery, what products would you prefer to be quickly
delivered?............................................................................................... 98
4.1.13 Research Question Thirteen: Will you be willing to pay
extra for a 10-min delivery? ................................................................... 99
4.1.14 Research Question Thirteen: Which of the facilities below
would you like to have during 10-min delivery model? ........................ 100
4.2 Research questions for e-commerce vendors ................................... 101
4.2.1 Research Question One and Two: Year of Establishment and
Registered Country............................................................................... 102
viii
4.2.2 Research Question Three: Geographical area of operations .......... 103
4.2.3 Research Question Four: What is the Average annual revenue
in USD million for last 5 financial years? ............................................. 104
4.2.4 Research Question Five: Do you deal in end-to-end supply
chain or have partners associated with you?.......................................... 105
4.2.5 Research Question Six and Seven: What stage of e-
commerce is your organization involved in? Which stage of e-
commerce do you have channel partners? ............................................. 106
4.2.6 Research Question Eight: Identify the challenges as an
organization you are facing with? ......................................................... 108
4.2.7 Research Question Nine: Quarterly investment related to
latest technology stacks for AI-ML, robots, digital web apps,
reporting & dashboarding etc? .............................................................. 110
4.2.8 Research Question Ten: Technology stacks already present in
the organization? .................................................................................. 110
4.2.9 Research Question Eleven: Technology stacks e-commerce
organization planning to deploy in next 6 months? ............................... 112
4.2.10 Research Question Twelve: Technology stacks e-commerce
organization planning to deploy in next 12 to 18 months? .................... 113
4.2.11 Research Question Thirteen: Reason for not investing in
technology stack? ................................................................................. 114
4.2.12 Research Question Fourteen: What is your logistics model,
do you have your own logistics and warehouse team? .......................... 115
4.2.13 Research Question Fifteen: What is your expense in having
your own logistics warehouse set up? ................................................... 116
4.2.14 Research Question Sixteen: What is your expense in having
logistics warehouse set up operated by third party logistics partner? ..... 117
4.2.15 Research Question Seventeen: What is your product
delivery model? .................................................................................... 118
4.2.16 Research Question Eighteen: What is your expense in
product delivery using your own employee and team? .......................... 119
4.2.17 Research Question Nineteen: What is your expense in
product delivery using delivery partner? ............................................... 120
4.2.18 Research Question Twenty: Are you aware of the concept of
co-owned or co-shared logistics and delivery model in e-commerce
supply chain? ....................................................................................... 121
4.2.19 Research Question Twenty-one: If your answer to above
question is (c) then what is the reason you do not want to use it? .......... 122
4.2.20 Research Question Twenty-two: If you are planning to go
with co-sourcing/ co-ownership model, then what is the expected
amount you will save per quarter? ........................................................ 123
4.3 Research questions for logistics & warehouse partners ................... 124
registered office.................................................................................... 125
ix
4.3.2 Research Question Three: Which geographical region(s) does
your logistics and warehouse organization operate in? .......................... 126
4.3.3 Research Question Four: What is your average annual
revenue per year for last 5 financial years? ........................................... 127
4.3.4 Research Question Five: Does your organization deal with
end-to-end logistics process of supply chain, or do you have sub-
partners with you? ................................................................................ 128
4.3.5 Research Question Six: What warehouse and logistics
processes is your organization involved with? ...................................... 129
4.3.6 Research Question Seven: For what part of logistics process
have you partnered? ............................................................................. 130
4.3.7 Research Question Eight: Do you have multiple e-commerce
vendors partnered for warehousing and logistics process? .................... 131
4.3.8 Research Question Nine: Identify challenges you face as a
logistics and warehouse partner? .......................................................... 132
4.3.9 Research Question Ten: Are you using robots and cobots in
your warehousing and logistics process? .............................................. 133
4.3.10 Research Question Eleven: What is your quarterly
investment related to latest technology stacks for AI-ML, robots,
digital web-apps, reporting & dashboarding etc? .................................. 135
4.3.11 Research Question Twelve: Which of the following stack is
already in place within your organization?............................................ 136
4.3.12 Research Question Thirteen: Which of the following stack
is your organization planning to deploy in the next 6 months? .............. 138
4.3.13 Research Question Fourteen: Which of the following stack
is your organization planning to deploy in the next 12 to 18
months?................................................................................................ 139
4.3.14 Research Question Fifteen: What is the reason for not
investing in technology stacks? ............................................................ 140
4.3.15 Research Question Sixteen: What is your logistics model,
do you have partners for logistics?........................................................ 141
4.3.16 Research Question Seventeen: What is your expense in
having your own logistics warehouse setup?......................................... 142
managing logistics using third party logistics partners? ........................ 143
4.3.18 Research Question Nineteen: What is your organization
product delivery model? ....................................................................... 143
4.3.19 Research Question Twenty: What is your expense in
product delivery by using your own employee and team? ..................... 144
4.3.20 Research Question Twenty-one: If you are using a delivery
partner, then, what is your expense in product delivery by using a
delivery partner? .................................................................................. 145
x
4.3.21 Research Question Twenty-two: Are you interested in co-
ownership or co-shared logistics and delivery model in e-
commerce supply chain for better business and revenue model? ........... 146
4.3.22 Research Question Twenty-three: If your answer to above
4.3.23 Research Question Twenty-four: If you are planning to go
4.4 Research questions for delivery partner .......................................... 149
end-to-end delivery process of supply chain, or do you have sub-
partners associated with you? ............................................................... 153
4.4.5 Research Question Six: What are the different modes of
delivery your organization deal in? ....................................................... 154
4.4.6 Research Question Seven: Do you have multiple e-commerce
vendors/ logistics team partnered for warehousing and logistics? .......... 155
4.4.7 Research Question Eight: Identify from below options
regarding the challenges you have been facing with? ............................ 156
4.4.8 Research Question Nine: What is your quarterly investment
related to latest technology stacks for AI-ML, robots, digital web
apps, reporting & dashboarding etc? ..................................................... 157
4.4.9 Research Question Ten: Which of the following technology
stack is already in place within your organization? ............................... 158
4.4.10 Research Question Eleven: Which of the following stack is
your organization planning to deploy in the next 6 months?.................. 160
your organization planning to deploy in the next 12 to 18 months? ....... 161
4.4.12 Research Question Thirteen: What is the reason for not
4.4.13 Research Question Fourteen: What are your expenses in
product delivery by self? ...................................................................... 163
4.4.14 Research Question Fifteen: If you have one, then what is
your expense in managing the logistics by a 3rd party delivery
partner? ................................................................................................ 164
4.4.15 Research Question Sixteen: Are you interested in co-
commerce supply chain for better business & revenue model?.............. 164
4.4.16 Research Question Seventeen: If your answer to above
xi
4.4.17 Research Question Eighteen: If you are planning to go with
co-sourcing/ co-ownership model, then what is the expected
4.5 Summary of Findings ..................................................................... 168
4.6 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 173
CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION ..................................................................................... 175
5.1 Discussion of Results...................................................................... 175

5.2 Discussion of Research Results for Online Buyers .......................... 176
5.2.1 Research Question One: What is your age group? ........................ 176
5.2.2 Research Question Two and Three: Where do you live
(Country, State and City)? .................................................................... 176
5.2.3 Research Question Four: What is your job sector? ....................... 178
5.2.4 Research Question Five and Six: What are your average
online purchases and which e-commerce platform(s) do you use? ........ 178
5.2.5 Research Question Seven and Eight: What type of products
do you purchase from online e-commerce vendors and reasons to
prefer online shopping? ........................................................................ 179
5.2.6 Research Question Nine: What are the reasons you would
leave an e-commerce vendor?............................................................... 180
5.2.7 Research Question Ten and Eleven: Will you be excited for a
quick delivery and what products would you prefer for quick
delivery? .............................................................................................. 180
5.2.8 Research Question Twelve: Would you be willing to pay
extra for quick delivery?....................................................................... 182
5.2.9 Research Question Thirteen: What facilities do you want to
have during quick delivery?.................................................................. 183
5.3 Discussion of Research Results for E-commerce Vendors .............. 183
Registered Country............................................................................... 184
5.3.2 Research Question Three and Four: Geographical area of
operations and Average annual revenue in USD million for last 5
financial years? .................................................................................... 184
end-to-end e-commerce process, or do you have partners
associated with it? ................................................................................ 184
5.3.4 Research Question Six and Seven: What stage of e-
commerce are you involved in and what stage of e-commerce have
you partnered for? ................................................................................ 185
5.3.5 Research Question Eight: Identify the challenges as an
organization you are facing with? ......................................................... 186
xii
5.3.6 Research Question Nine: Quarterly investment related to
latest technology stacks for AI-ML, robots, digital web apps,
reporting & dashboarding etc? .............................................................. 186
5.3.7 Research Question Ten: Technology stacks already present in
the organization? .................................................................................. 187
5.3.8 Research Question Eleven and Twelve: Technology stacks e-
commerce organization planning to deploy in period of next 6
months to 18 months?........................................................................... 187
5.3.9 Research Question Thirteen: Reason for not investing in
technology stack? ................................................................................. 188
5.3.10 Research Question Fourteen: What is your logistics model,
do you have your own logistics and warehouse team? .......................... 188
5.3.11 Research Question Fifteen: What is your expense in having
your own logistics warehouse set up? ................................................... 189
5.3.12 Research Question Sixteen: What is your expense in having
logistics warehouse set up operated by third party logistics partner? ..... 189
5.3.13 Research Question Seventeen: What is your product
delivery model? .................................................................................... 189
product delivery using your own employee and team? .......................... 190
5.3.15 Research Question Nineteen: What is your expense in
product delivery using delivery partner? ............................................... 190
5.3.16 Research Question Twenty: Are you aware of the concept of
co-owned or co-shared logistics and delivery model in e-commerce
supply chain? ....................................................................................... 191
5.3.17 Research Question Twenty-one: If your answer to above
5.3.18 Research Question Twenty-two: If you are planning to go
5.4 Discussion of Research Results for Logistics & Warehouse
Partners ................................................................................................ 191
5.4.2 Research Question Three: Which geographical region(s) does
your logistics and warehouse organization operate in? .......................... 192
revenue per year for the last 5 financial years?...................................... 192
end-to-end logistics process of supply chain, or do you have sub-
partners with you? ................................................................................ 193
5.4.5 Research Question Six: What warehouse and logistics
processes is your organization involved with? ...................................... 193
xiii
5.4.6 Research Question Seven: For what part of logistics process
have you partnered? ............................................................................. 194
5.4.7 Research Question Eight: Do you have multiple e-commerce
vendors partnered for warehousing and logistics process? .................... 194
5.4.8 Research Question Nine: Identify challenges you face as a
logistics and warehouse partner? .......................................................... 194
5.4.9 Research Question Ten: Are you using robots and cobots in
your warehousing and logistics process? .............................................. 195
5.4.10 Research Question Eleven: What is your quarterly
investment related to latest technology stacks for AI-ML, robots,
digital web-apps, reporting & dashboarding etc? .................................. 195
already in place within your organization?............................................ 195
5.4.12 Research Question Thirteen and Fourteen: Which of the
following stack is your organization planning to deploy in the next
6 months to 18 months?........................................................................ 196
5.4.13 Research Question Fifteen: What is the reason for not
5.4.14 Research Question Sixteen: What is your logistics model,
do you have partners for logistics?........................................................ 197
5.4.15 Research Question Seventeen and Eighteen: What is your
expense in having your own logistics warehouse setup vs using
third party logistics partners?................................................................ 197
5.4.16 Research Question Nineteen: What is your organization
product delivery model? ....................................................................... 197
5.4.17 Research Question Twenty and Twenty-one: What is your
expense in product delivery by using your own employee and team
vs using a delivery partner? .................................................................. 198
5.4.18 Research Question Twenty-two: Are you interested in co-
commerce supply chain for better business and revenue model? ........... 198
5.4.19 Research Question Twenty-three: If your answer to above
5.4.20 Research Question Twenty-four: If you are planning to go
5.5 Discussion of Research Results for Delivery Partners ..................... 199
xiv
end-to-end delivery process of supply chain, or do you have sub-
partners associated with you? ............................................................... 200
5.5.5 Research Question Six: What are the different modes of
delivery your organization deal in? ....................................................... 200
5.5.6 Research Question Seven: Do you have multiple e-commerce
vendors/ logistics team partnered for warehousing and logistics? .......... 201
5.5.7 Research Question Eight: Identify from below options
regarding the challenges you have been facing with? ............................ 201
5.5.8 Research Question Nine: What is your quarterly investment
related to latest technology stacks for AI-ML, robots, digital web
apps, reporting & dashboarding etc? ..................................................... 201
5.5.9 Research Question Ten: Which of the following technology
stack is already in place within your organization? ............................... 202
5.5.10 Research Question Eleven and Twelve: Which of the
following stack is your organization planning to deploy in the next
6 months to 18 months?........................................................................ 202
5.5.11 Research Question Thirteen: What is the reason for not
5.5.12 Research Question Fourteen: What are your expenses in
product delivery by self? ...................................................................... 203
5.5.13 Research Question Fifteen: If you have one, then what is
your expense in managing the logistics by a 3rd party delivery
partner? ................................................................................................ 203
5.5.14 Research Question Sixteen: Are you interested in co-
commerce supply chain for better business & revenue model?.............. 204
5.5.15 Research Question Seventeen: If your answer to above
5.5.16 Research Question Eighteen: If you are planning to go with
co-sourcing/ co-ownership model, then what is the expected
CHAPTER VI: SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....... 205
6.1 Summary ........................................................................................ 205

6.2 Implications.................................................................................... 206
6.3 Recommendations for Future Research ........................................... 226
6.4 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 228
REFERENCES............................................................................................................ 230
APPENDIX A SURVEY COVER LETTER ............................................................. 233
APPENDIX B INFORMED CONSENT ................................................................... 236
xv
APPENDIX C INTERVIEW GUIDE ........................................................................ 237
LIST OF TABLES
Table-1 Measurable KPIs .............................................................................................. 32
Table-2 Age wise respondents breakup .......................................................................... 90
Table-3 Respondents Breakup geography wise .............................................................. 91
Table-4 Top 5 Respondents Breakup region wise (78% of the respondents)................... 92
Table-5 Respondents Breakup job sector wise ............................................................... 92
Table-6 Respondents average online purchases.............................................................. 94
Table-7 Respondents preference of e-commerce vendors and platforms based on
survey data .................................................................................................................... 95
Table-8 Respondents preference of products via online purchases ................................. 96
Table-9 Respondents reasons for leaving e-commerce vendors ...................................... 97
Table-10 Respondents reasons for doing online purchases ............................................. 98
Table-11 Respondents acceptance for quick delivery ..................................................... 98
Table-12 Respondents type of products for quick delivery ............................................. 99
Table-13 Respondents willingness to pay extra for quick delivery ............................... 100
Table-14 Respondents choice of facilities they want to avail for quick delivery ........... 101
Table-15 Table depicting participation % age-wise and state wise ............................... 177
Table-16 Table depicting job sector contribution % vs participation % age-wise ......... 178
Table-17 Insourcing process KPI list ........................................................................... 210
Table-18 Warehouse collaboration KPI list ................................................................. 212
Table-19 Collaborative Transport KPI list ................................................................... 213
Table-20 Vendor SOB KPI list .................................................................................... 213
Table-21 Last mile delivery collaboration KPI list ....................................................... 214
xvi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure-1 Year on Year (YOY) e-commerce conversion rates ........................................... 1
Figure-2 AI Implementations in e-commerce value chain .............................................. 11
Figure-3 Static Pricing comparision with Dynamic pricing ............................................ 16
Figure-4 Drone market contribution............................................................................... 17
Figure-5 Technology Adoption Report .......................................................................... 26
Figure-6 Last mile delivery management ....................................................................... 29
Figure-7 End user online survey .................................................................................... 79
Figure-8 E-commerce vendor online survey .................................................................. 80
Figure-9 Third party logistics and warehouse partner online survey ............................... 80
Figure-10 Delivery Partner Online Survey ..................................................................... 81
Figure-11 Respondents whether they use online purchase platform................................ 93
Figure-12 Organization Establishment Year plotted on the time chart. ......................... 103
Figure-13 Country where the organization is registered. .............................................. 103
Figure-14 Geographical area of operations. ................................................................. 104
Figure-15 Average annual revenue for last 5 years....................................................... 105
Figure-16 Vendor wise end to end process ownership bifurcation. ............................... 106
Figure-17 Stages in which E-commerce vendors are involved in. ................................ 107
Figure-18 Stages in which partners of e-commerce vendors are involved in................. 108
Figure-19 Challenges of an e-commerce vendor. ......................................................... 109
Figure-20 Quarterly investment by an e-commerce vendor. ........................................ 110
Figure-21 Technology stack adopted by e-commerce vendors. .................................... 112
Figure-22 Technology stacks planned to be deployed in 6 months. .............................. 113
Figure-23 Technology stacks planned to be deployed in next 18 months...................... 114
Figure-24 Reasons for not investing in technology adoption. ....................................... 115
Figure-25 Operating model of logistics and warehouse ................................................ 116
Figure-26 Expenses ratio breakup of managing self-logistics and warehouse ............... 117
Figure-27 Expenses ratio breakup by managing logistics and warehouse by using
partners ....................................................................................................................... 118
Figure-28 Operating model of last mile delivery .......................................................... 119
xvii
Figure-29 Ratio of cost of operating model of last mile delivery .................................. 120
Figure-30 Cost of operating model of last mile delivery using partners ........................ 120
Figure-31 Choice of co-owned or co-shared operating model ...................................... 122
Figure-32 Reason of not opting for co-owned or co-shared operating model ................ 123
Figure-33 Savings per quarter if chose to go with co-sharing and co-ownership
model .......................................................................................................................... 124
Figure-34 Year wise establishment of Logistics and Warehouse .................................. 125
Figure-35 Country of Operations of Logistics and Warehouse ..................................... 126
Figure-36 Country of Operations of Logistics and Warehouse ..................................... 127
Figure-37 Last 5 years average annual revenue chart ................................................... 128
Figure-38 Ratio of involvement of partners with logistics team ................................... 129
Figure-39 Warehousing and logistics process with logistics team ................................ 130
Figure-40 Partnership breakup by logistics team.......................................................... 131
Figure-41 Breakup of logistics partnership (dedicated vs multiple e-commerce
vendors) ...................................................................................................................... 132
Figure-42 Challenges faced by logistics and warehousing partners .............................. 133
Figure-43 Acceptance breakup in % for adopting to robots/ cobots in logistics
process ........................................................................................................................ 135
Figure-44 Quarterly investment by logistics team on AI-ML technology stack ............ 136
Figure-45 Technology stack adopted by e-commerce vendors. .................................... 138
Figure-47 Technology stacks planned to be deployed in the next 18 months. ............... 140
Figure-49 Partnership model of logistics and warehouse .............................................. 142
Figure-50 Expenses ratio breakup of managing self-logistics and warehouse ............... 142
Figure-51 Expenses ratio breakup by sub-contracting logistics and warehouse ............ 143
Figure-52 Operating model of logistics and warehouse partner .................................... 144
Figure-53 Ratio of cost of operating model of logistics and warehouse process ........... 145
xviii
model .......................................................................................................................... 149
Figure-58 Year wise establishment of Delivery Partners .............................................. 150
Figure-59 Country of Operations of Delivery Partners ................................................. 151
Figure-60 Geographical area of operations. ................................................................. 152
Figure-61 Last 5 years average annual revenue chart ................................................... 153
Figure-62 Ratio of involvement of partners with last mile delivery team ..................... 154
Figure-63 Various delivery modes used by last mile delivery team. ............................. 155
Figure-64 Breakup of last mile delivery partnership (dedicated vs multiple e-
commerce vendors) ..................................................................................................... 156
Figure-65 Challenges faced by last mile delivery partners ........................................... 157
Figure-66 Quarterly investment by last mile delivery team on AI-ML technology
stack ............................................................................................................................ 158
Figure-67 Technology stack adopted by last mile delivery partners. ............................ 160
Figure-69 Technology stacks planned to be deployed in the next 18 months. ............... 162
Figure-71 Expenses ratio breakup of managing self-delivery to last mile ..................... 163
model .......................................................................................................................... 167
Figure-76 Comparison of the reasons for an online buyer to leave e-commerce
vendor ......................................................................................................................... 180
Figure-77 Ratio of online buyers for quick delivery ..................................................... 181
Figure-78 Preferences of products for quick delivery by online buyers ........................ 182
Figure-79 Depiction of willingness of online buyer to spend extra for quick
delivery ....................................................................................................................... 182
Figure-80 Analysis of facilities required by online buyers for quick delivery ............... 183
Figure-81 Proposed Collaboration Framework Model ................................................. 209
Figure-82 Collaboration Governance Model ................................................................ 219
Figure-83 Collaboration Maturity Model ..................................................................... 222
xix
Figure-84 Technology stack solution ........................................................................... 224
Figure-85 Mail Artifact for e-commerce supply chain players ..................................... 234
Figure-86 Invitation for online survey to online buyers ................................................ 235
Figure-87 Consent request from organization to use name ........................................... 236
xx
CHAPTER I:
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
Kiniulis M. (2022) in its study of “e-commerce conversion rates-2022” has
provided statistical figures which depict that retail e-commerce sales have clocked 4.9
trillion USD worldwide in 2021 and is forecasted to grow reaching about 7.4 trillion USD
by 2025. At the same time, it compares the number of users growing from 2.05 billion in
2020 to increase by 2.14 billion in 2021 which makes 27.6% of 7.74 billion people living
in the world.
Figure-1
Year on Year (YOY) e-commerce conversion rates
Source: MarkinBlog Site ‘World wide e-commerce sta�s�cs’ - 2022
The statistical figures mentioned above comes with its own set of challenges for e-
commerce vendors like “Dynamic shift in customer loyalty”, “Dynamism in product
pricing”, “Adherence to quality standards”, “Managing customer expectations” and
“Supply chain dilemma in warehousing and last mile delivery”.
Come Covid-19 and the coined word “quick commerce” actually took a flight and
there was a rush among the e-commerce vendors to deliver products within 30 to 45
minutes, however this was restricted only to food deliveries and the other product deliveries
including medicines are still in the wake of 2 to 5 days or more. The radical change in
business thought process actually provisioned to optimize the existing supply chain process
for meeting customer expectations in terms of faster and quality delivery. This led to
1
opportunity for increase in demand of more manpower, integrated network of stores,
change in digital applications to name a few. However, the q-commerce came with its set
of worms in the can, says (BusinessToday.In 2022) “Indian grocery startups are luring
tech-savvy customers with the promise of deliveries within 10 to 20 minutes, sparking a
boom in quick commerce, but heating up concerns about road safety as bike riders scramble
to meet deadlines.”
With the rise of retail sales in e-commerce, there were multiple research held across
globe for:
• Research provisioning Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) to
solve routing problems, optimizing pick-up and delivery schedule challenges,
capacity optimization etc. Researchers like Auad R. et. al. have developed
framework for ‘Dynamic courier capacity acquisition using deep q-learning AI
approach’.
• Research on use of robots/ cobots at warehouse to manage logistics, un-manned
road and arial vehicles for safe and faster delivery.
• Intelligent Analytics out of historical data accumulated to provide rich insights for
better business decisions.
However, all this research still does not solve the problem of how last mile delivery
timeline can be reduced from 5 days to 30 minutes, and here, I intend to propose a
framework which will allow different e-commerce vendors to provision a maturity of last
mile delivery from 5 days to 30 minutes. The framework can be horizontally deployed to
any geographical location within different e-commerce vendors and will be backed with:
• Infra resource sharing like warehousing and storage partners, delivery partners etc.
• Adaptation to latest technologies involving AI, ML, robotics and digital apps.
• Optimizing supply chain process in effort to reduce the stress on traffic and human
live conditions thereby having saving in terms of insurance, repairs etc.
This study will cover different stakeholders, the first stakeholder would be public
at large who are using e-commerce for their online purchases. The second stakeholder
2
would be the e-commerce vendors while other stakeholders would be those who act as
logistics and end mile delivery partners. The contribution of this study would be to the e-
commerce vendors, warehouse partners and delivery partners in embracing technology and
co-ownership for managing last mile delivery 20 to 30 minutes.
1.2 Research Problem
The world is gradually shifting from windows shopping culture to online retail sales
and e-commerce industries along with customer mindset was getting attuned to it, however,
with advent of Covid-19 the online e-commerce sales gotten a booster kick start shattering
all previous culture adoption and statistics. The food delivery model became the torch
bearer where they were able to deliver the product within 45 minutes to 90 minutes
depending on the traffic and weather conditions while other products, including medicines,
are still lagging from next day delivery to 5 day delivery model. In this research proposal
we intend to propose a framework which will mature from 5 days last mile delivery model
to 1 day to 90 minutes to finally 30 minutes last mile delivery model. Having said so, the
framework will have some challenges as below:
a. How to improve traffic conditions in the heat of fact that the delivery is supposed to be
done in next 30 minutes from packaging at warehouse to last mile delivery?
b. How to ensure that the delivery boys do not run a risk/ threat of accidents in heat of
delivering fast and saving on insurance, accidents & repair costs?
c. Are the e-commerce vendors ready to invest in technology innovations and share the
same with other supply chain partners working with them?
d. Are the lawmakers of the countries and governments ready to make amendments in the
law for adoption of technology, security of customer data, provisions of tax rebates for
using technology which promotes reducing carbon footprints?
3
In this research, we will try to address the following problems which will cater to
the above-mentioned challenges:
a. Co-sharing and co-owning of warehouses, dark stores, last mile delivery partners to
speed up end delivery time.
b. Adoption of technology using robots and un-manned vehicles in entire supply chain
process for better management of logistics and faster with safer delivery.
c. Solving the delivery scheduling problem by using digital apps and AI-ML to optimize
the number of deliveries to be done vs delivery operators available. We will look into
the research done by Frank M et. al (2020), Ostermeier M. et. al. (2021), Liu Z. et. al.
(2024) and Beneich et. al (2023) to solve multi-compartment vehicle routing problem
using AI.
d. Solving the delivery routing problem and wide area search problem by using AI-ML to
optimize the best route to deliver in case of multiple and dynamic delivery.
Provision of real-time analysis (weather, traffic, dynamic delivery etc.) via real time
data and historical data available
1.3 Purpose of Research
The long term goal/ objective of the research is to develop a formalised framework
for developing maturity in e-commerce supply chain journey from 5 days last miles
delivery to 30 minute last mile delivery model and it will be backed by:
a. Proposed technology advancements using Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine
Learning (ML) to resolve/ optimize supply chain issues in logistics, scheduling and last
mile delivery.
4
b. Proposed integrated and connected environment of robots in warehouse for managing
logistics operations leading up-to manned delivery boys and un-manned road/ aerial
vehicles for last mile delivery.
c. Strong real time updates of every stage in supply chain process, weather conditions,
traffic conditions etc. and strategic insights from historical data to take business
strategic decisions on the fly.
d. Paradigm shift in e-commerce vendors operations working model from end-to-end
ownership to co-sourcing/ co-ownership business model for logistics – warehousing
and last mile delivery.
1.4 Significance of the Study
The above objectives of the research metioned in section 1.3 will attack many
constraints of e-commerce supply chain and they will be the sub-objectives/ benefits of this
research, which are as below:
a. Co-sourcing and co-ownership partnership model with warehouses and delivery
partners will provision deep penetration in remote geographical areas which will
directly increase the market share and brand value of e-commerce vendors.
b. 30-minute last mile delivery model will cement the leadership position of e-commerce
vendor in the market and will also tackle one of the most important challenges of
dynamic shifting of customer loyalty.
c. Allocation of right mix of delivey people w.r.t. geographical location and time to
manage dynamic scheduling and delivey thereby improving cost of operations. The
reduced cost of operations can be given back to the customers in terms of competitive
pricing model or discounts or coupons.
5
d. Better traffic condition can be achieved based on real time traffic and weather
conditions reducing traffic snarls and accidents. This indirectly will lead to redcution
in carbon footprint as well as a reduction in accidental as well as insurance claims.
e. Due to deep geographical penetration of e-commerce vendors in rural areas (based on
co-ownership and co-sourcing model), there will be rise in small scale local businesses
which certainly will give rise to more local jobs and higher standards of living.
The results of this study will be valuable to e-commerce vendors, logistics and delivery
partners in supply chain process, software development companies who will develop
digital apps for support of e-commerce vendors and their partners as they will all play
crucial role in optimizing the process, reducing the inefficiencies and participate in making
life and world more better.
1.5 Research Questions
The research poses questions to multiple stakeholders like e-commerce users (who
are involved in online purchases), e-commerce vendors (who provide end to end platform
for online sales), e-commerce partners (who are involved in logistics, warehouse
management, supply chain management, delivery partners etc.) at all scale.
Base questions for this research are as follows:
a. Online Buyers: Are the consumers willing to pay extra for 30 minutes delivery? If yes,
how much extra would the online buyers pay? What type of products would end-users
prefer within 30 min delivery?
b. E-commerce Vendors: Are e-commerce vendors matured enough to co-share and co-
own the logistics and delivery process and partners? Are e-commerce vendors geared
up to develop dark stores near to consumers to facilitate quick delivery? Are e-
commerce vendors willing to invest in AI and technology innovations?
6
c. Logistics and Delivery Partners: Are the logistics and end mile delivery partners ready
to invest in the technology innovations? Are they matured enough with data and process
to fully use the intelligent analytics to keep themselves updated with near real-time
updates.
7
CHAPTER II:
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction
In the era of Covid-19, e-commerce vendors found itself wanting for a radical
upgrade and vertical shift in the process and technology so that they could keep pace with
customer’s demand. With customer’s attention shifting from outlet shopping to online
shopping the trend towards home delivery and technological growth paced up in the e-
commerce sector. However, this lateral shift also brought in certain challenges, and it
became importance of utmost nature for all e-commerce vendors to address the challenges
posed:
a. Dynamic shift in customer loyalty: As per Aslam et. al. (2019) “Customer loyalty and
trust are the key factors for long-term profitability and growth for organizations”. Aim
of the e-commerce vendors is to grow its market share by offering best possible value
to customer at least possible cost. The e-commerce players have taken the online
shopping to next level that the customers are spoils for choice leading to shifting of the
loyalty of a customer. Verona G. et. al. (2002), in her research speaks about the dynamic
model of customer loyalty and the approach for maintaining the market edge in this
competitive environment.
b. Dynamism in market prices: As per Vijay Victor (2019) “Today, online pricing has
evolved into a very efficient and sophisticated pricing strategy where product prices
are personalised and tailored to the last conceivable individual buying unit possessing
similar characteristics”. With increase in competition, inflation and rise in deficit of
profits the delivery services must focus upon adopting offensive or defensive pricing
models to deal with the competitors. Specifically, the perishable product vendors and
food delivery vendors struggle to find the right pricing model.
8
c. Adherence to quality standards: The quality standards have different measurable
parameters depending on type of products being shipped and hence this brings another
level of challenges for the e-commerce vendors. Measurable factors for quality
standards will differ based on fragile items, perishable items and non-perishable items.
Hence, the process of warehousing, transportation has to be modified to manage
optimum quality.
d. Managing customer expectations: As per Hadleigh Reid (2022) in his blog for DCL
Logistics, states, capturing higher market share will always be a failed attempt if the
customer expectations are not met by e-commerce vendors and partners involved in
delivery. It is a challenge to fill the gap that exists between delivery partners and
product owners to work together and meet customer expectations proactively.
e. Supply Chain Dilemma: Logistics challenges faced by perishable product vendors are
immense as they cater to wider geography, area specific orders, allocation of right
number of vehicles at right time vs right place, ensuring optimum quality etc. are some
of the critical supply-chain related issues. Drexl M. (2021) in his research paper touches
the challenges of one-to-one pickup and delivery problem with time windows with
capacitated vehicles using single delivery vehicle – delivery boy – delivery route
combination problems.
It becomes imperative for all e-commerce vendors to address the above prominent
issues to not only sustain themselves in the competitive market but also make a mark for
themselves. To sustain and flourish, every e-commerce vendor needs to adopt to the
technology innovations and optimize their business processes for adapting to stricter KPIs.
Top trends paving way to shape the last mile delivery in 2022 – 2025:
9
a. Contactless Delivery: According to Salesforce survey, close to 40% of the US
customers prefer contactless delivery due to security and safety reasons and e-
commerce vendors and last mile delivery partners have adopted the same very well.
b. Autonomous vehicles, drones and delivery bots: Amazon and Alphabet are leading
innovations and technology embracements by spending around USD 500 millions in
autonomous technology.
c. Increase in urban fulfillment centre’s and micro-warehouses: Quick commerce players
are setting up the warehouses very near to end consumers so that the delivery promised
timelines can be met.
d. Intersourcing last mile deliveries for faster fulfillment: Rather than developing their
own delivery team from scratch, ecommerce vendors should depend on partnering with
local delivery partners and have hybrid fleet management system for faster fulfillment.
Kronmueller M. et. al. (2021) in his research paper touches on the subject of on-demand
grocery delivery from multiple local stores in autonomous robots.
e. Decision based on intelligent analytics: Adoption to near-real time monitoring
solutions allows delivery patterns and e-commerce vendors to take informed decisions.
The empirical research utilised for the literature review was gathered by:
• Conducting various searches on online databases like Google Scholar,
ResearchGate, ERIC, IEEE and Science Journal. Searches were made against the
specific keywords like quick commerce, last mile delivery, autonomous vehicles
for supply chain and fast fulfillment of e-commerce delivery.
• Online Questionnaires were developed for e-commerce users, e-commerce
vendors, warehouse & logistics partners and last mile delivery partners based on
which the empirical framework is developed.
10
2.2 Theory: Adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI) – Machine Learning (ML) –
Intelligent Analytics (IA) – Robotics for succeeding ’30-minutes delivery model.’
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has a great use in the ecommerce industry and Tingting
Cao (2019) in his review in ‘Synced Review’ represented through the picture:
Figure-2
AI Implementations in e-commerce value chain
Source: Synced Review Blog – 2019
There are numerous challenges which surface up during the last mile delivey and these
challenges can surmount to traffic conditions, weather conditions, delivery routing
11
challenges, mix-match of the number of riders location wise or time wise etc. There has
been research done on this area, but all research is done based on singularity of the subject.
As a researcher, I certainly believe that we need to look holistically for AI-ML &
connected environment to solve the last mile delivery problems through efficient and
optimized solutions which can be saved on time – cost – resources, and, obviously be
sustainable – scalable – horizontally deployable.
In this paper we will discuss the usage of AI-ML & IIOT for resolving complex
challenges, Intelligent Analytics provisioning stakeholders to take quick and right
decisions based on the insights and automated delivery vehicles which can provide efficient
delivery at last mile delivery of ecommerce vendors.
2.2.1 Reasoned Action: Usage of AI-ML & IIOT technology to enable quick and
efficient complex solutions.
As per Peter Judah (2021), “Artificial Intelligence is a term that is now known to
almost everyone and is among the trends and innovations of Industry 4.0 for 2020. It is a
much-discussed topic in the field of technology. Artificial Intelligence and machine
training are the driving forces across different industries”.
The challenges which can be solved using the efficient use of AI-ML are:
a. Delivering Routing Problem: This is one real time challenging requirement of the “30-
minute delivery” model supply chain which is being researched by many researchers
across the globe. There are many algorithms which are getting researched and
promoted to support quick delivery, some of the famous algorithms are Dynamic
Vehicle Routing Problem (dVRP), Location Routing Problem (LRP), Meal Delivering
Routing Problem (MDRP), Dynamic Pickup and Delivery Problem (dPDP) etc. In
their papers Damian Reyes et. al. (2018) “The Meal Delivery Routing Problem”, Juan
C. Pina-Pardo et. al. (2022) “Design of two-echelon last-mile delivery model” and
12
Dipayan Banerjee et. al. (2020) “Fleet Sizing and Service Region Partitioning for
same-day delivery systems” have emphasized on the challenges the vendor faces with
putting up the right mix of number of vehicles to be deployed, the right schedule
routing with short drops, right assignment etc.
However, it should be noted that these algorithms are just a representation of
solution approach, and it does not cover any mechanism to learn and re-implement and
rectify the previous mistakes as well as optimize it. It is where, AI-ML reinforcement
learning algorithms, heuristics algorithm, Q-learning algorithms will come to aid for
developing mechanism where in the delivery routing and scheduling algorithms can be
trained with previous set of data to act on different set of parameters.

b. Scheduling and Dynamic Pick-up Problem: This is another big challenging area for quick
delivery e-commerce vendors & partners and research is being carried out particularly to
address this problem by using algorithms like Location Routing Problem (LRP). As per
Dipayan Banerjee et. al. (2020) “Due to low order volumes and large number of potential
delivery locations, last-mile delivery is generally cost-inefficient in contrast to other parts
of freight logistics system”. The 30-minutes delivery model presents additional
challenges due to significantly tighter time constraints, in contrast to traditional last-mile

delivery systems that allow for longer response times. In 30-minutes delivery systems,
request arrival, order picking and processing, vehicle loading, and delivery all occur
within span of a 30 minutes bringing additional time constraint challenges.”
The use of AI-ML can assist to bring a solution based on reinforced learning where
in the data can be used to learn the pattern of delivery success or failures based on
historical data of schedules, delivery points, delivery demography and suggest the best
approach for rescheduling, routing, pickup and drop.
13
c. Large Neighborhood search: This is a burning topic in last mile delivery where-in the
logistics problem of pickup and delivery is not only constrained to routing and delivery,
but it extends to capacity, dynamic fleet of delivery, delivery time based on sliding
window for customer satisfaction and how to learn from past. Wang W. et. al. (2022) in
his research paper provides a two stage algorithm to optimize delivery routing on time
sensitive customer satisfaction evaluation. There are algorithms like Rich Pickup and
Delivery Problem with Time Windows (RPDPTW) and Adaptive Large Neighborhood
Search (ALNS) but they have restrictions as they are Point to Point solutions and based
on scenarios they have to be adapted and changed. Lutz R. (2014) discusses about ALNS
with heuristics for rich pickup and delivery problems within sliding time windows for
identifying the delivery routes based on shifting time.

Here is where AI-ML and connected IIOT can play a big role as it can not only ingest to
aggregate data from the devices like GPS, barcode/ quad code scanners, delivery data
updates etc. but also create best heuristic search and implement algorithms based on
historical data collected by different devices at different stages of last mile delivery. The
combination of connected environment, data pooling and AI-ML can certainly help to
take quick and efficient decision leading to higher success rate of delivery.
Roman Lutz (2014) in his paper “Adaptive Large Neighborhood Search” has defined the
algorithm of how ALNS and heuristic search can be used for solving the pickup and
delivery problem and this paper should be combined with AI-ML practices to include
learning from past and have better delivery rate.
d. Real time monitoring of almost every part of supply chain: One of the requirements of
last mile delivery partners is to take decision of how efficient delivery can be done, and
to assist them it is very beneficial to know the real time status of various stages in delivery
supply chain. The real time monitoring can be provided by connected environment of
14
IIOT by using technology and hardware’s, so for example a GPS fitted in the delivery
vehicle (manned and un-manned) helps to gather information about precise location of
delivery vehicle and whether he would be able to delivery at right time, whether he would
capacity to take another delivery from somewhere in between as a short break etc.
With real time information at hand, the delivery partners will have enough data to work
around minimizing efficiency and customer wait period for last mile delivery.
2.2.2 Reasoned Action: Usage of Intelligent Analytics for decision insights
E-commerce vendors and partners need better insights to make judicious decisions
for optimized and efficient supply chain process for better last-mile delivery. It is the need
of hour where the last-mile delivery partners are in dire want of software’s which can
provide them with great insights of their business on click of button whenever and
wherever needed. As per Dr. Leonard Heiling et. al. (2018) “The intelligent supply chain
combines modern technologies, such as blockchain and IOT, with intelligent decision-
making and analytics capability in order to improve visibility and predictability, flexibility
and customer interaction, inter connectivity and collaboration as well as risk awareness and
resilience.”
Such intelligent analytics software would solve the following challenges:
a. Price sensitiveness and Fluctuating price problem resolution: With competition in
place, paradigm shift in technology landscape, changing prices of human labor – crude
oil, dynamic shift of customer loyalty due to multiple choices etc. it is becoming a
daunting task for e-commerce vendors to manage price of a product to lure customer
towards itself and increase product sales. Big players like Amazon are known for re-
pricing strategies where the price of a product does not remain constant but changes
based on competitors price, demand & supply and market trends.
15
This is where the Intelligent Analytics, based on the data aggregated from various
customers over time, can track – monitor – analyze competitor’s prices, pricing history
to get a clear picture of where a respective brand stands in market and how to position
itself in real time. These intelligent analytical tools configure rules for automatic
pricing and provide recommendations for how the pricing strategy should be placed.
Figure-3
Static Pricing comparision with Dynamic pricing
Source: Firebear Studio website on ‘Best dynamic optimization’ - 2015
b. Near one real time insights at every part of supply chain: Dr. Leonard et. al. (2018) says
“Companies making use of near or real time analytics and technologies supporting it
only need few days to reach to market trends, or are even able to anticipate demand, in
order to work with zero safety stock leading to just-in-time inventory strategies”.
c. Change of operational culture from being reactive to being proactive: Dr. Leonard et.
al. (2018) says “Modeling and Analytics capabilities, such as predictive analytics,
assist in reducing uncertainties regarding future scenarios provisioning to respond to
question – What will happen in future; rather than being traditionally descriptive and
diagnostic asking – What is happening & Why did it happen”.
d. Insights to understand root cause of inefficiencies, disruptions and anomalies in supply
chain: Shifting from traditional descriptive and diagnostics operating culture to
16
proactive operating culture and responding to questions like “What is going to
happen?” will provision vendors to relook at data from fundamental prescriptive
analysis, automation and optimization and providing automated decisions thus
answering the final question “What is the best course of action?”. It is known that
Amazon holds a patent for anticipatory shipping which means that products are shipped
before a customer place an order.
e. Integration, coordination and collaboration between supply chain actors: With
intelligent analytics and prompt decision insights there can be provisions resulting into
higher flexibility between various supply chain actors. This higher flexibility will
become enablers for a high degree of integration, collaboration, data sharing,
coordination between supply chain actors and also supply chain vendors.
2.2.3 Reasoned Action: Usage of Robotics and autonomous vehicles for minimizing
human efforts for complex deliveries.

Figure-4
Drone market contribution.
Source: Businesswire News 21st July 2023

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230721993519/en
Innovations are at its peak this decade and has been embraced widely in
manufacturing, healthcare, finance as well as supply chain. The last mile delivery partners
and vendors have made good use of innovations done in different domains. Even though
the innovations are gearing up but we find that the vendors are yet to fully utilize the
capacity and capability these autonomous vehicles like drones, self-driving cars, and robots
provide for participating in successful last-mile-delivery.
17
As per Paul Okhrem (2022) in his paper “Drone Delivery – Benefits, Obstacles and
the Future of ecommerce trends” indicates “Back in 2016 The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) – a US legislative body responsible for the air traffic regulation
– predicted that by 2020 there will be 7 million drones flying in the sky. Instead, in 2020
the worldwide drone shipment reached only 5 million units. Meanwhile, in 2022 FAA
announced that it registered 865,505 drones so far.” This is a great example where-in the
requirements of using unmanned vehicles are high from ecommerce and other players
while the administration is keeping a check on the regulation of air traffic.
Such ecosystem of robots, cobots, drones, autonomous vehicles would solve the
following challenges:
a. Time-sensitive critical delivery of goods to rural areas: There are countries where rural
areas have much bigger transportation challenges and hence many a times critical
deliveries either fail or it takes long time before the need diminishes.
As per Gayathri et. al. (2020), autonomous vehicles like Drones would be a great
help in such cases as they would not get stuck in air traffic and due to GPS delivery can be
done in precise location at right time. Drones are easily deployed, and most drone delivery
systems are semi-automated. As soon as the package has been attached, the drone will have
all the info it needs from the central command to deliver the package to its destination.
Drone flight is completely autonomous and there will be no issues with traffic and
congestion. Skoufi E. et. al. (2021) in his research paper talks about last mile delivery by
drones and stresses on the shortest route to be easily calculated, and customers to get an
accurate time of arrival.
b. Improve performance in last mile delivery: Autonomous vehicles have greater impact
in countering traffic congestion, climate changes, defining fastest route at real time etc.
All of these provisions for improved performance of last mile delivery which is not
18
possible or very challenging in case of human deliveries as humans are prone to climate
changes and traffic conditions.
c. Cost reduction: In the case of autonomous vehicles the CAPEX cost is there however
due to low OPEX cost it is always a cost-effective approach where-as on the other hand
the OPEX cost always increases in terms of human delivery approach. These costs
include petrol/ diesel, human insurance, accidental benefits cost etc. which does not
happen in case of autonomous vehicles. Due to the reduction of cost at delivery
operations the benefit can be passed in terms of product pricing by the ecommerce
vendors to the customers.
d. Environment friendly: The autonomous vehicles running using electricity will be a great
move for the environment as they become radical players in reducing carbon footprint.
With global warming in picture, it would be needed to move from fossil fuel to more
cleaner fuel and ecommerce and logistics team can take a lead in this area. Johnson D.
et. al. (2021) in his research paper discusses about evaluating last mile delivery using
traffic simulator and how the novelty has harmonized network efficiency and
environmental stability in Washington D.C.
Solving these challenges would not only resolve real-time business issues but
would also provide cost and time saving to ecommerce vendors. While connected
environment will be responsible for collating data from various devices at different stages
of supply chain and inserting them into data lake giving enormous assistance for real time
information needed to know status of supply chain lifecycle, on the other hand the routines
of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (AI-ML) would learn from the data set and
provide optimized solutions/ approach for delivery routines which will assist the decision
makers to take timely decisions removing the inefficiency from the supply chain process.
It would also assist the ecommerce vendors and the last mile delivery partners to take quick
19
business calls and be pro-active, which would help in having satisfied customer, higher
market shares, chances to focus on innovations and also maximizing capacity & capability
within supply chain process. Finally, it would assist the ecommerce vendors and the last
mile delivery partners to save on human insurance cost (which in-fact is very costly),
reduced operating cost as the number of delivery cycles can be increased without increasing
the headcount.
2.3 Theory: Hybrid model of co-sourcing and co-ownership between e-commerce
vendor – 3PLs – Last Mile Delivery players must need for ‘30-min delivery model.’
Ecommerce at any scale contains one important barrier, to manage cost, involved
in supply chain operations. There is Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) as well as recurring
Operating Expenses (OPEX) cost involved to start an ecommerce venture and not to forget
adoption of technology. In this literature review, we propose to move from complete
ownership model to co-sharing/ co-ownership model for some processes in supply chain
which needs huge investment of cost and geography/ terrain knowledge. Some of the
primary candidates in ecommerce roadmap would be dark stores or fulfilment centers, data
sharing and last mile delivery vendors. The co-sourcing/ co-ownership model would reduce
the burden of cost and operations from the ecommerce vendors, and they can focus of
improving the supply chain process to position themselves as market leaders. This will
involve 3rd party logistics provider, 3rd party delivery provider, 3rd party data aggregation
provider.
2.3.1 Reasoned Action: Usage of Robotics and autonomous vehicles for minimizing
human efforts for complex deliveries.
Amit Khare (2022) in his research paper says “The concept of ‘Dark Store’ in India
is still one which is finding its foot in the market. It is one of the models which got famous
20
as an effect of long lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic. It can be simply explained
as a store with a virtual ordering interface that supplies daily necessities including groceries
to the doorstep of the customer. This can simply mean a work-from-home scenario for
grocery and supply merchants.”
Many ecommerce vendors are in process or in planning to create more and more
fulfillment centers operating close to the customer but they are vendor owned. It would be
an optimization to have co-owned and co-shared fulfilment centers and it would solve the
following challenges:
a. Cost of recurring infrastructure expenses to be shared and hence reduced: It is
important to note that the cost of delivery of goods will go down if the operating
expenses are reduced. Ecommerce vendors can plan and think of co-souring or co-
owning the fulfilment centers which will certainly reduce the CAPEX (Capital
Expenditure) and OPEX (operating expenditure) cost indicating further reduction in
the cost of good thereby provisioning customers to buy from those vendors adhering
same quality but reduced cost or offered discounts.
b. Reaching larger audience and removing geographical obstacles: Since creation of
fulfilment centers involves cost at the ecommerce vendors hence to manage economies
of scale and operations ecommerce vendors are unable to break geographical barriers.
With the approach recommended in this paper of co-owning or co-sourcing the
fulfilment centers, by collaborating with different vendors obviously, the geographical
barriers can be removed and very large audiences across the globe can be targeted. This
will assist ecommerce vendors to become international vendors rather than being local
vendors.
c. Effective management of perishable items using fulfilment centers: One important
challenge which these fulfilment centers face is regarding managing perishable items.
21
They are important to be managed efficiently and delivered to the customer within the
right quality parameters. Due to enablement of such fulfilment centers the ecommerce
vendors specially in food and perishable items market cross the entry barrier and attend
to large customers. Some good examples in India would be “Licious”, “FreshToHome”,
“BigBasket”, “DMart” etc.
2.3.2 Reasoned Action: Co-ownership of data between different sourcing vendors.
There has been mushrooming of ecommerce players across the geography with
large, medium and small sized vendors trying to make a mark in this domain. However,
due to economies of scale there are many small ecommerce vendors who take a bow and
exit the market. It should be noted that these small players do have a large set of customer
and customer preference data which certainly can be of magnitude use to the mid and large
sized vendors still in the game. Co-ownership of data between e-commerce vendors can
solve few challenges as below:

a. Save time and energy to generate data: Data generated at different stages of the e-
commerce lifecycle are important for e-commerce vendors and partners as they act as
great source of learning and insights to take decision for efficiently managing supply
chain process. Co-ownership of data removes the vendor process to re-invent the wheel
and go through the process again to generate customer data, preferences data, transport
system data, climate data, delivery data etc. Since the data can be shared (based on
mutual agreement between the vendors) it can save time, lots of energy and vendors can
directly focus on the delivery process.
b. Insights to the requiredet and decide course of action: One of the major challenges which
will surface up in qcommerce “10-minutes delivery” model is that the vendor will need
to have all required information to decide if they would like to operate in that specific
22
market based on the product line. Co-sourcing of data will provide them the insights and
degree of freedom to manage their economies of scale.
2.3.3 Reasoned Action: Co-owned or Co-sourced delivery partners.
Delivery partners involved at last mile delivery are key actors in the entire supply
chain and they are also the ones to make or break the reputation of the vendor’s brand,
hence, it is utmost necessary to have right set of delivery partners. The challenge does not
stop here with selection of right delivery partner but also as how optimize the delivery
process can be in terms of right number of delivery boys in action, right number of delivery
vehicles in actions etc. and it all boils down to money. As of now, every vendor has their
own delivery partners and there is a good amount of investment involved. This research
paper proposes co-sourcing or delivery partners which will solve the following challenges:
a. Optimization of vehicle delivery and delivery boys: One of the major and critical
problems to resolve in the supply chain process is optimal number of delivery vehicle
and delivery boys so that “10-minute delivery” model can be a success. In this paper we
propose to have a “Delivery-as-a-service (DaaS)” where-in an agreement can be
arranged between the ecommerce vendor and the delivery operator for modulus
operandi. Within the DaaS mechanism the delivery operations can be a 3rd party team
which caters to the delivery needs of multiple vendors (taking an example of India post,
US post, AU post etc) with a defined rate card. Since this model is based on rate card
there would be no CAPEX for the ecommerce vendors but this being OPEX model
reduces burden of cost and operations from the ecommerce vendors.
b. Economies of scale for innovative ways for delivery: In co-sourcing or co-ownership
model, since the cost of delivery is shared, hence the ecommerce vendors will have
options and opportunities to spend in innovation of delivery which earlier would be a
23
difficult proposition for one single vendor. Use of autonomous vehicles, drones etc can
certainly be options to explore.
2.4 Disagreements to above theory
Following are the disagreements to the above theory:
a. The cost involved in developing and implementing the know-how of using drones and
unmanned aerial vehicles in delivering last mile will be very high and would act as an
entry barrier to the quick commerce domain. Not all ecommerce vendors and delivery
partners would be in a position to fully/ optimally use this technology stack.
b. Synchromodality of transport is still a concept for increasing the supply chain

intelligence and has not seen light till now. This mode of transport would need new eyes
for change in traffic regulations, laws and operating model by different vendors and
supply chain actors. Zhang Y. et. al. (2022) in his research paper talks about
synchromodal transportation system mathematical model which can optimize routes for
fixed and flexible vehicles.
c. Regulations in air and road traffic depending on country’s readiness for acceptance of
un-manned vehicles: This is an area which needs attention from country law-makers
and is a highly debatable topic citing security and operational risks. There are very few
countries who are embracing the autonomous/ unmanned vehicles future in the regular
life process however they too do not have complete law and process in place. This might
take years and will depend on the risk appetite of every country individually.
d. Different ecommerce vendors would not like to share their data, last mile delivery
partners and fulfilment centers in target of capturing more market share and edging the
competition by becoming industry leader.
24
e. Due to branding competition and its impact on achieving market share there can be a
reluctance among ecommerce vendors to come on same table for co-ownership model.
f. There has been no precedence of co-ownership approach between ecommerce vendors
and hence the transaction errors, transaction per million, is not yet established in such
scenarios. There would be a requirement of lean six sigma process to be adhered and
the resultant data as well as approach to be implemented by various vendors and
partners.
2.5 Human Culture as Important Factor to Technology Adoption

In today’s ecommerce ecosystem vendors and partners have a very good appetite
towards embracing new innovative technology and a culture has been inculcated where the
ecommerce stakeholders are ready to make operational and organizational changes to
embrace new technologies providing assistance to run business smoothly and seamlessly.
Top players like Amazon, Walmart, Flipkart, Myntra, Alibaba are investing in AI-ML,
Intelligent Analytics, Drones, Robotics, Cobots etc to take the supply chain processes to
the next level. Hence the organizational culture is to use latest technology stack and
improve on the process, while the end customer also has been adopting technology
advancements to enjoy benefits from their home.
Following below is the report from MHI Annual Industry report where-in the
technology adoption rate has been stated in terms of % use today vs adoption rate in 2 years
vs adoption rate in 5 years vs adoption rate beyond 6 yrs. The below graph is evident that
adoption of AI-ML and autonomous vehicles adoption is yet not matured but has a long
way to go and human culture is ready to embrace it.
25
Figure-5
Technology Adoption Report
Source: 2020 MHI Annual Industry Report – mhi.org
2.6 Human Culture as Important Factor to Process Adoption
In current ecommerce ecosystem, the culture is to own the entire supply chain
milestones starting from procurement process – logistics – order management – delivery
management and ecommerce vendors in a bid to gain more market share, do not co-share
or co-own the processes involved for logistics and delivery. Due to this practice the
operations cost for ecommerce vendors is high, which can be brought down by the
proposals outlined above in this document. The benefit obtained from reducing the cost of
a product can be passed to the customer in the form of discounts or any promotional offers
which will certainly increase customer satisfaction.
However, it should be noted that:
a. Movement from ownership mindset to collaborative mindset would require a cultural
change in the vested interest of stakeholders. The collaborative mindset would assist
stakeholders to move to co-ownership practice and reap benefits of cost sharing model.
26
b. The approach proposed above will also induce an operational change along with
cultural change at different milestones of supply chain process. This operational
change would allow the vendors to focus on innovations and optimize the processes
for better reach to end customers.
2.5 Summary
Through the literature review we can conclude that if we need 10-min delivery
model to succeed in its supply chain lifecycle then following will have important role to
play in the success journey:
a. A connected environment has a big role to play in last mile delivery as it will be
responsible for collection of data from various stages and lifecycle of supply chain.
The data will be collected from various devices, gadgets, wearables, software apps
thereby providing real time information of the supply chain stages per delivery. These
connected environment data will be put into data lake for better analysis and reach.
b. AI-ML has a big role to play in last mile delivery as they will take burden of learning
from the aggregated data and provide the best optimized approach for logistics and last
mile delivery. They will be key contributors for ecommerce vendors and their partners
in terms of bringing efficiency in operational process, cost and inventory management
which will in turn enhance customer satisfaction. AI-ML will not only give rise to
learning platforms from data lake but also give rise to intelligent analytics which will
provide insights of how better the supply chain and process could be by analyzing the
historical data in data lake.
c. Autonomous vehicles would be a game changer for last mile delivery as it will have
its major role in safe delivery, timely delivery, reduction in accidents, reaching remote
areas etc. They will also play an important role in the environment by shifting the
27
dependency from fossil fuel to solar fuel or any other better options of fuel there by
being party to reduce carbon footprint.
d. Collaboration & Co-ownership between ecommerce vendors and partners would
take the logistics and supply chain to next level where-in rather than focusing on
owning every single stage of supply chain, they can focus on their core areas while the
expert partners can take the rest of the supply chain process. This will certainly bring
in a more collaborative nature of operations thereby shifting the singular ownership
model to co-ownership model which will have positive impact in reduction of
operating costs which finally can be transferred to customer in terms of reduced price
or coupon benefits.
While doing this literature review, we find that there are many research materials
which talks about last mile delivery issues and tries to resolve them but all of them are
pointed solutions which focus on only one problem area, hence research is need of time
where-in all these problems can be threaded into one full research providing a framework
for ’10-minute delivery approach’. We also promote a concept of proposing an approach
of co-shared and/ or co-owned stages between ecommerce vendors and various partners to
bring in higher degree of ownership, reduced process cost by optimizing efficiency,
sharing/ co-owning dark stores to reduce logistics cost etc. which will help ecommerce
vendors and partners to become agile, become market leaders and also have a good base of
loyal and satisfied customer.
28
CHAPTER III:
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Overview of the Research Problem
The literature from Stanford University clearly depicts that last mile delivery would
be the prime focus of the e-commerce vendors which will be slated to progress in some
years as they will have to cover the urban, rural, densly populated areas using innovative
technologies. The picture pasted below is from the source of Stanford University giving a
comprehensive picture of last mile delivery scope.
Figure-6
Last mile delivery management
Source: Stanford Education Publication
29
In a literature from PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PWC), it has been made evident that
41% of consumers are willing to pay a charge of same-day delivery while nearly a quarter
(24%) of shoppers said that they would pay more to receive packages within a one-or two-
hour window of their choosing. After going through the mentioned literature, it is observed
that there is a space to be researched on how to optimize the supply chain process for quick
commerce vendors to position themselves very near to customer without sacrificing the
breadth of products to be delivered. The research would then extend to how machine
learning can be enforced to forecast the demand and keep the dark stored hydrated with the
right demand, at the same time ensuring that the mode of transportation and the route of
transportation supports last mile delivery in a very quick and efficient way without
compromizing the quality parameters of delivery which could be “hot/warm for food”,
“undamaged fragile products”, “undamaged packaged delivery” etc.
On the other hand while doing the literature review, we could not find any literature
which focused on how to setup a model framework for “last mile delivery” maturing from
“1 week delivery” to “30 min delivery” model, so taking this cue in accordance there are
certain KPIs which we figured out obviously needing to be tapped: a) Reduction of
operating cost from stores to end consumers b) speed up last mile delivery from stores to
end consumers c) increasing potential of delivery of products from multiple stores d)
decreasing the cost of health insurance of delivery person e) decrease in cost of car/ bike
insurance of delivery person.
In the light of above the literature objective in nutshell would be to develop an
approach/ framework for last mile delivery of products supporting quick e-commerce and
establish KPIs which can be measured to contemplate success of defined approach/
framework
30
3.2 Operationalization of Theoretical Constructs
3.2.1 Objectivity/ Concept
The researcher in this reasearch study intends to setup a framework which would
allow the e-commerce vendors to setup an operational framework within their supply chain
ecosystem so that they define optimized SLA’s for their delivery process. The primary
research method for this study was to undergo various literature review, analyzing different
case studies on same subject and collation of data collected from online survey
questionnaires for end customers/ users, e-commerce vendors & their supply chain
partners, leading to development of conceptual model to address 30-minutes last mile
delivery challenges. The two concepts/ theories which are being validated as part of this
research are:
o Adoption of AI-ML-IA-Robotics for faster & optimized last mile delivery

o Co-owning and co-sharing of logistics & warehouses and delivery partners.
The objectivity of this research can be defined as:
o Optimization of last mile delivery process backed by strong intelligent analytics
o Optimization of last mile delivery process backed by strong AI/ML algorithms

ensuring availability of best options during delivery process
o Optimization of entire delivery process backed by real-time information network
provisioning the stakeholders to take pro-active measures.
o Identification of measurable KPIs which can be horizontally deployed by various
ecommerce vendors.
31
3.2.2 Measurable KPIs and its indicators
The above mentioned two concepts/ theories are targeting two different types of
stakeholders playing pivotal role within e-commerce supply chain process. The first
category of stakeholder(s) are the end consumers of the e-commerce supply chain who
makes online purchases and expect the delivery in time with the right quality standards
while, on the other hand, the next category of stakeholder(s) are the e-commerce vendor(s)
and the last mile delivery partner(s) whose key parameter is to ensure that delivery of
products happens within agreed timeline, at agreed destination and within agreed standards
of delivery.
Table-1
Measurable KPIs
Measurable KPI’s Stakeholder SLA Indicators
Timely Delivery of good(s) by e- Delivery Partner 100% Total number of goods
commerce vendor portal delivered on �me vs total
number of goods
delivered
Quality Delivery of good(s) to the Delivery Partner 100% Total number of goods
end-user returned back by the user
vs total number of good
delivered
Op�mizing supply chain process for E-commerce >=85% Number of key business
faster delivery - annually vendor processes op�mised vs
benefits obtained post
op�misa�on of processes
Op�mizing logis�cs process at 3PL >=85% Reduc�on in �me to
warehouse for faster search, search - iden�fy - procure
packaging and pickup – annually – package and prepare for
pickup by delivery person
Op�mizing delivery resource count Delivery Partner >=90%
based on delivery des�na�on and
delivery count – quarterly
Reduc�on in road accidents and Delivery Partner >=95% Reduc�on in accidents
insurance claims – monthly and insurance claims
month on month
Source: Author
32
3.2.3 Reliability
Reliability would be an important factor in this entire research as it will provide
enough confidence to the users of this research over authenticity of the framework, data
and the published results. The reliability factor will depend on two important aspects:
• Empiricism: During research our goal would be to provide quantifiable observation and
measurable findings. To achieve quantified values, we intend to break down intangible
concepts into recordable characteristics for example perceived vs achieved efficiency
at warehouse or at delivery or at aligning delivery routes etc.

This dissertation would be a quantitative dissertation where-in researcher intends to
take particular approach to theory by setting up a hypotheses, a research strategy, a
survey for stakeholders and strategizing conclusions from obtained results. Hence, this
research would be a data driven and would hold for the defined theoretical approach.
• Objectivity: The researcher has singular objectivity in this research and it is to provide
enough substantial data points to support the theory and the framework which can be
consistently used by other researchers and they too get the similar results.
However, this research will have its own natural impediments:

• Lack of universality: Some of the topics of this research will be valid only for some
countries and would not be applicable for other countries for example: challenge of
road accidents due to rush in delivering, count of claim settlements due to hostile traffic
conditions etc.
• Lack of acceptance: One of the strong aspect of this research is co-ownership of
logistics, warehouse and delivery partners by the different e-commerce vendors and
there might be a possibility that smaller players joins hands to bring in efficiency of
their process and reduce operational costs but the larger players might not want to do
33
it to diminish their market lead or brand. In such cases, the theory will be fit only to the
smaller local players.
3.3 Research Purpose and Questions
3.3.1 Research Purpose
The purpose of this research is to establish a scalable framework/ model which can
be deployed by various e-commerce vendors at different geographical locations by
implementing small tweaks to original framework. The scope of framework would also be
extended to third party logistics partner(s) and last mile delivery partner(s) who are an
integral stakeholder of this framework. The framework will attempt to answer two
imporant theories of research as:
o How can co-sourcing and co-owning of logistics, warehouse and last mile delivery
partners ensure quick delivery of ordered products within agreed quality parameters?
o How can latest technology adoption assist in optimizing scale of economies and
operations for last mile delivery?
To bring this research to a logical conclusion an online survey has been designed
for a) end consumer which is public at large, b) e-commerce vendor, c) warehouse &
logistics partner, and finally, d) delivery parter. The online survey results are logged and
analysed for deriving a conclusion. The intent of having these questionnaires for different
stakeholders are as below:
o E-commerce consumer:
• Is the ecommerce consumer ready to spend extra money for quick delivery?
• What type of products are in demand for quick delivery?
• What method of delivey is preferable?
o E-commerce vendors:
34
• Would the e-commerce vendors like to co-share warehouse – logistics – delivery
partners with other ecommerce vendors?
• What level of risk capability are the e-commerce players displaying to embrace
advance technologies like intelligent analytics, robotics and machine learning
algorithms?
• What level of investments are the e-commerce vendors ready to adopt process and
technology optimizations?
o Supply chain partners like logistics & warehouse, delivery partners etc:
• What level of risk capability are the supply chain partners displaying to embrace
advance technologies like intelligent analytics, robotics and machine learning
algorithms?
• What level of investments are the supply chain partners ready to adopt process and
technology optimizations?
3.3.2 Research Questions
The research questions are developed for various stakeholders with a view to
capture inputs/ responses which can prove wether the proposed theory is correct or
incorrect along with various data which can assist in developing the proposed model/
framework.
Questions for End User who are online shoppers:
i. What is your age group?
[Intent of question]: This question allows researcher to understand the bifurcation
of age group bracket involved in e-commerce. However, since the population of the
users taking this survey would be majorly the social and personal connects of the
researcher, it is expected that the data will swing more towards the age group >=35.
35
Still this is a good data to understand how authentic the response are and also
finalize on the standard deviation as well as the expected error in response.
[Options given to respondents]:
• <16 yrs.
• 16 to 20 yrs.
• 21 to 30 yrs.
• 31 to 40 yrs.
• 41 to 50 yrs.
• >50 yrs.
ii. Where do you live?
[Intent of question]: This question allows researcher to understand the bifurcation
based on geography. This data will assist to understand the sentiment of the
respondents at geography level.
We ask for the country and the state they are currently living in.
iii. What is your job sector?
[Intent of question]: An important question which allows the researcher to
understand the usage pattern of respondent based on the type of shopping done vis-
à-vis the nature of work they do on regular basis. This question will also let the
researcher analyze if the online shopping is centralized in a family or decentralized
within the family.
[Options given to the respondents]:
• Government Organization
• Public Undertaking Organization
• Private Organization
• Student
36
• House maker
• Unemployed
iv. Do you use e-commerce for online purchases?
[Intent of question]: This question segregates the respondents based on whether
they are involved in doing online purchases. For those respondents who are not
doing online purchases, the online survey stops as the online survey is not meant
for them and the data would be of no use to the research.
Yes or No
v. What is your average online purchase(s)?
[Intent of question]: This question allow the researcher to understand the online
purchase behaviour of the respondents. The researcher is able to visualize whether
the response data would pave way to propose the model. If the average online
purchase is less then it makes very little sense to the e-commerce vendors and the
delivery partners to invest in the optimization of process and technology
advancements.
• Can be none sometimes.
• Less than 2 items a week
• Between 2 to 5 items a week
• More than 5 items a week
vi. Which e-commerce platform(s) do you use more?
[Intent of question]: This question will clearly depict the e-commerce platforms or
vendors who are playing a major role in online shopping as per the geography. This
also paves the foundation for which type of e-commerce vendors should the
37
researcher approach to know their strategy which can be a foundation for the
framework/ model for this research.
• Amazon
• Flipkart
• Myntra
• Snapdeal
• Reliance Trend
• Decathlon
• BigBasket
• Blinkit
• Licious
• DMart
• StarBazaar
• Zomato
• Swiggy
• Box8
• Others, please mention
vii. What type of product(s) do you purchase from online e-commerce vendors?
[Intent of question]: This is a very important question for the research to understand
if the type of products purchased online are really a candidate for the quick delivery
or not. Hence if the respondents choose more of perishable items, it gives high value
of confidence to the researcher for moving ahead with the research.
• Kitchen Groceries
38
• Fresh Meat and Sea Food
• Fresh Vegetables and Fruits
• Clothes
• Electronics Items
• Medicines
• Healthcare products
• Cosmetics
• Children Stationary and Toys
• Jewellery Items
• Hardware and tools
• Others
viii. What is/ are the reason(s) you prefer online shopping?
[Intent of question]: This question is of high value to the researcher to understand
the sentiment of the respondent in terms of whether the proposed framework/ model
would be of any value to the respondents at large. If the reasons to prefer online
shopping are thin or random then the model would not have many buyers.
• Convenience for purchase at click of button and delivery at doorsteps.
• Ease of trial at home comfort and return back at will.
• Discounts and coupons provided during online sales.
• Delivery at my desired location and at desired time
• Price competitiveness between all vendors displayed online for customer
ease.
• Others than mentioned above.
ix. What are the reasons you would leave a e-commerce vendor?
39
[Intent of question]: This question allows the researcher to capture sentiment of the
respondent to not use online shopping. The question is a very strategic question in
terms of how the e-commerce vendors should percieve their success rate of having
more customers and not loose market share.
• Bad reputation in quality of delivery
• Not having enough variety as compared to other vendors
• High price of product as compared to other vendors
• Bad reputation on returnable items process
• Bad reputation on post sales customer service
x. If your e-commerce vendor(s) provide you the purchased product(s) in 10 minutes
will you be excited?
[Intent of question]: This is a very strategic question to the entire research as this
creates the demand of the framework. If there are good number of respondents who
are interested in quick delivery then certainly it makes a huge sense formulating the
framework/ model.
• I will certainly be interested to get my purchased product(s) in 10 minutes
• Well, I will like it but it will depend on type of product(s) I am purchasing
• I would not bother about quick delivery, but I would expect a reasonable time
of delivery
• I seriously do not bother at all, they should deliver whenever they can
xi. If you had been interested in 10 minutes delivery, what products would you prefer
to be quickly delivered?
40
[Intent of question]: This is a very strategic question to the entire research as this
supports the demand of the framework based on what type of products the end
customer is looking for quick delivery. This question is not only helpful to setup
the framework/ model but also to the e-commerce vendor for how to optimize their
process based on products to be delivered.
• Medicines
• Healthcare products and Cosmetics
• Fresh Meat and Sea Food
• Fresh Vegetables and Fruits
• Electronics Equipment's needed for my work
• Hardware Tools needed for my work
• Everything I online purchase from e-commerce
xii. Will you be willing to pay extra more for a 10-min delivery?
[Intent of question]: This is one of the strategic question for the research as it
provides the direct relationship between the research output i.e. framework/ model
and the supporters from the end user perspective. Commonized theory here is that
if there are online buyers who are interested in spending more money to get quick
delivery then the ecommerce vendors can strategically optimize their delivery
model to suit the customers need.
• Yes, I will be ready to pay 10% – 15% more
• Yes, I will be ready to pay 7% - 10% more but not beyond
• Yes, I will be ready to pay 5% - 7% more but not beyond
• Yes, I will be ready to pay max 1% - 4% more but not beyond
41
• No, I am not willing to pay anything extra
xiii. Which of the facilities below would you like to have during 10 minutes delivery
model?
[Intent of question]: A very strategic question where-in the researcher gets more
insights on the type of services end users are expecting from e-commerce vendors.
This question also provides base for the researcher to prepare the right framework/
model supporting the research.
• I am interested only in the delivery of my goods in 10 minutes.
• Clear communication provides me to track goods I have ordered.
• Safe delivery with quality adherence
• Delivery only by delivery humans
• I don’t care if delivery is done by humans or robots.
Questions for e-commerce vendors
i. Please provide name of your organisation and the year of its establishment
[Intent of question]: This question is to capture the e-commerce vendor name but it
is important to notice that the year of establishment directly relates to the experience
the online vendor is carrying in this research space. Hence the response from this
vendor is equally important to establish the credibility of the process for quick
delivery.
[Options given to the respondents]: Just text to enter the name of the organization
and the inception year
ii. Where is the corporate office of your organisation?
42
[Intent of question]: This question is to understand the origin of the e-commerce
vendor and this reveals the fact as what would be the base mindset of e-commerce
and supply chain for this vendor. This question allows an insight into how quick
the organization would be adapt to process optimization and technology adaptation.
[Options given to the respondents]: Textual field to enter the corporate office of the
organization.
iii. Which geographical region(s) does your e-commerce organisation operate on?
[Intent of question]: This question establishes the e-commerce vendor credentials
of his exposure to multi-geography supply chain insights. If an e-commerce vendor
is operating at multiple geographic locations then there are many insights which
can be derived related to operating partners in specific geography, adoption/
deployment to technology enhancements in various geographic locations etc.
• North America
• South America
• Africa
• Europe
• Asia
• Middle East
iv. What is your average annual revenue per year for last 5 financial years (in terms
of million US $)?
[Intent of question]: This question is to ascertain the revenue of the e-commerce
organization. This is an important insight as it allows researcher to visualize if the
e-commerce vendor has risk taking capability while process optimization and
technology adaption transformation is proposed.
43
• Less than 1 million USD
• 1 million to 5 million USD
• More than 10 million USD
v. Does your organisation deal into end-to-end e-commerce processes and supply
chain or do you have partners associated with you?
[Intent of question]: This question provides a good insight to understand if the total
cost of ownership is only borne by the e-commerce vendor or is it shared between
the e-commerce vendor and the delivery partners. This question has another view
where-in it also provides insights about end to end responsibility of managing the
logistics, supply chain and the delivery of the product ordered for.
• We take care of end to end e-commerce as a vendor
• We have partners who take care of different life cycle of e-commerce supply
chain
vi. What stage in ecommerce is your organization involved with?
[Intent of question]: This question is an extension of the last question where-in
researcher gets more information about the direct and indirect involvement of the
e-commerce vendor in the entire supply chain process of e-commerce.
• E-commerce strategy and branding
• Sourcing materials and supply chain
• Warehousing and logistics
• Last mile delivery
44
• Developing digital solutions (mobile and web app, algorithms for better
delivery, right product estimation etc.)
• Providing market insights and SEO
• Accounting, billing and record keeping
• Customer care call centre
vii. You have partners for which part of e-commerce life cycle?
[Intent of question]: This is a validation question from the last question where-in
we try to understand better about the partnerships done by the e-commerce vendor
to operationally execute the day to day operations of e-commerce supply chain and
delivery. This also provides a right intent to understand the fact as in which
geographical locations has the e-commerce vendor done partnership and which
ones he owns the full supply chain.
• E-commerce strategy and branding
• Sourcing materials and supply chain
• Warehousing and logistics
• Last mile delivery
• Developing digital solutions (mobile and web app, algorithms for better
delivery, right product estimation etc.)
• Providing market insights and SEO
• Customer care call centre
viii. Identify from below options regarding the challenges you have been facing with?
[Intent of question]: This question is to understand the daily operation challenges
in e-commerce, and it is important to know this because this will direct the attention
45
of the e-commerce vendor to resolve first rather than pay attention to the proposed
framework. However, it should be noted that the options given to the respondent in
this question will directly relate to the framework/ model development.
• Dynamic shift in customer loyalty
• Dynamic pricing as per market shift
• Adhering to quality while delivering
• Managing customer expectations of delivery
• Supply chain dilemma for best combination of routing and delivery
• Adoption to latest technology for faster and safe delivery fulfilment
• Adoption to latest technology for real time insights for intelligent decision
making and analysis
• Reducing operating cost and abreast market edge
ix. What is your quarterly investment related to latest technology stacks for AI-ML,
robots, digital web apps, reporting & dash-boarding etc.
[Intent of question]: This question is of importance to the researcher as it allows to
understand the investment pattern of the e-commerce vendor. This response from
the respondent allows researcher to finalize the primary candidate to approach for
proposing the model once it is approved.
• We have not yet done any investment.
• Less than 10000 USD
• Between 10000 USD to 25000 USD
46
• More than 100000 USD
x. Which of the following technology stack is already in place within your
organisation?
[Intent of question]: This question is to understand the maturity of the e-commerce
vendor regarding the technology adoption in its organization. This question also
provision the researcher to understand which all vendors would be the right
candidate of this research adoption once the framework/ model is developed and
promoted.
• Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for logistics and warehousing
• Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for mapping location wise
customer interest
• Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for delivery operations and
routing optimisations
• Robotics, Autonomous vehicles (road and air) for last mile delivery
• Intelligent Analytics and Dash-boarding for real time and time-series status
• Real time notification based on real time supply chain life cycle insights
• None of the above
xi. Which of the following technology stack is your organisation planned to deploy in
next 6 months?
[Intent of question]: This question is adjacent to the previous question for those
vendors who have not yet invested or adopted to the technology as of now, but are
preparing for its adoption in next 6 months. These vendors are of interest to the
47
researcher as they are another prime candidate to whom the framework can be
proposed.
customer interest
xii. Which of the following technology stack is your organisation planned to deploy in
next 12 to 18 months?
[Intent of question]: Same as above question with only difference of timescale.
customer interest
48
xiii. What is the reason for not investing in technology stacks? (If you have selected
‘None of the above’ in above 2 questions)
[Intent of question]: This question is very important to researcher as it provides
insights to the fact that there are e-commerce vendors who would have challenges
to adopt the process optimization and technology adoption. Such e-commerce
vendors are prime candidates of this research where a framework/ model is being
proposed for co-sharing/ co-owning of physical infrastructure and the technology
along with its research and investment.
• We do not have funds for investing in technology stacks
• We do not have adequate skills to identify the right technology stack needed
for us
• We are yet to earn our break-even from our business
xiv. What is your logistics model, do you have your own logistics team and
warehousing?
[Intent of question]: This question is to ascertain if the e-commerce is taking full
ownership and responsibility of e-commerce platform and logistics setup.
• Yes
• No, we have a 3rd party logistics vendor working with us as a partner
xv. What is your expense in having your own logistics warehouse setup?
[Intent of question]: This question is to ascertain the overall cost the e-commerce
vendor is having to setup the logistics and warehouse. The imporatnt aspect here is
how the e-commerce vendor can be a market leader in dynamic pricing by reducing
the total cost of ownership.
49
• Less than 1000 USD per quarter
• Between 1000 USD to 5000 USD per quarter
• More than 20000 USD per quarter
• We don’t have our own logistics setup
xvi. If you are having one, then, what is your expense in maintaining logistics by a 3rd
party logistics partner?
[Intent of question]: The question is asked to understand the expenses done by the
e-commerce vendor in maintaining logistics by a partner. This provides a direct
comparision of cost of ownerhsip if the logistics and warehouse is done in-house
by the e-commerce vendor or by 3rd party partner.


• We don’t use 3rd party logistics and we have our own setup
xvii. What is your organisations product delivery model?
[Intent of question]: Just like above questions, this question allows the researcher
to have a view as how the e-commerce vendors are managing their last mile
delivery. This is important start to understand if there could be optimization to have
operational efficiency and better last mile delivery.
50
• We have our own end to end delivery team starting from Apex centre to last
mile delivery
• We have partnered with delivery operators for our product delivery
xviii. What is your expense in product delivery by using your own employee and team?
[Intent of question]: This question allows the researcher to gauge the expenses
borne by the e-commerce vendor when the product last mile delivery is done by the
e-commerce vendor himself. This is a great insight to see if there can be an
optimization and the proposed model of co-owning and co-sharing can come into
play.
• We don’t have our own team for delivery and we have outsourced to delivery
partner
xix. If you are using a delivery partner, then, what is your expense in product delivery
by using a delivery partner?
[Intent of question]: This question is in accordance with the last question to capture
details of investment/ expense done by the e-commerce vendor if delivery partner
is being used. It also provides a good insight regarding whether there is any cost
benefit with those vendors who are using delivery partners vis-à-vis the vendors
who are delivering it by their own.
51
• We don’t use delivery partners but have our own delivery team
xx. Are you aware of the concept of co-owned or co-shared logistics and delivery
model in e-commerce supply chain?
[Intent of question]: This is a very important question for this research so that
researcher can gauge the amount of e-commerce vendors are aware of this concept
or there is a need to have more informational sessions with the vendors on this
concept.
• No, we are not aware of it and not interested to know about it
• No, we are not aware of it and are interested to know about it
• Yes, we are aware of it, but we do not want to use it
• Yes, we are aware of it, and want to work on it in next 6 months time
• Yes, we are aware of it, and we do not know how to start as there are
geographical local players
• Yes, we are aware of it, and we have already started exploring for the
opportunities in current geography as well as external geography
• Yes, we are aware of it, and we are in implementation stage
xxi. If your answer to above question is (c) then what is the reason you do not want to
use it?
52
[Intent of question]: This question is aligned to the last question where-in researcher
want to gauge the reason as why the e-commerce vendor is not interested in the co-
ownership/ co-sharing model.
• Our e-commerce model is a time tested model and we do not have any
strategic plan to change it
• We have analysed the cost of co-sharing/ co-ownership but it is not making
much of difference in terms of cost
• It does make sense in terms of cost, but we are not sure of brand security in
co-sharing/ co-ownership model
xxii. If you are planning to go with co-sourcing/ co-ownership model, then what is the
expected amount you will save per quarter?
[Intent of question]: This question is also aligned with the above two questions to
understand the cost saving expected for co-sharing/ co-owneship model.
• I don’t know if we have details as of now
Questions for Logistics & Warehouse partners
53
[Intent of question]: This question is to capture the logistics partner name but it is
important to notice that the year of establishment directly relates to the experience
the logistics partner is carrying in this research space. Hence the response from this
logistics partner is equally important to establish the credibility of the process for
quick delivery.
[Intent of question]: This question is to understand the origin of the logistics partner
and this reveals the fact as what would be the base mindset of logistics and supply
chain for this vendor. This question allows an insight into how quick the
organization would be adapt to process optimization and technology adaptation.
organization
iii. Which geographical region(s) does your organisation operate on?
[Intent of question]: This question establishes the logistics credentials of his
exposure to multi-geography supply chain insights. If an logistics partner is
operating at multiple geographic locations then there are many insights which can
be derived related to operating partners in specific geography, adoption/
• North America
• South America
• Africa
• Europe
54
• Asia
• Middle East
iv. What was your revenue across the financial years (in terms of million US $)
[Intent of question]: This question is to ascertain the revenue of the logistics vendor
logistics partner has risk taking capability while process optimization and
v. Does your organisation deal into end-to-end logistics processes of supply chain or
do you have sub-partners associated with you?
cost of ownership is only borne by the logistics partner or is it shared between the
e-commerce vendor and the delivery partners. This question has another view
• We take care of end to end logistics partner for our e-commerce vendors
• We have sub-partners who are involved take care of different life cycle of e-
commerce supply chain
• In certain cases when we have extra load we use sub-partners to clear load
vi. What warehousing and logistics processes is your organisation involved with?
55
[Intent of question]: This question is an extension of the last question where-in
researcher gets more information about the direct and indirect involvement of the
logistics partner in the entire supply chain process of e-commerce.
• Warehousing and logistics at self
• Managing warehousing and logistics at sub-partners end
• Transport facility for pickup and drop
• Export and Import
• Last mile delivery to customers
vii. For what part of logistics process have you partnered?
we try to understand better about the partnerships done by the logistics partner to
operationally execute the day to day operations of e-commerce supply chain and
geographical locations has the logistics partner done partnership and which ones he
owns the full logistics supply chain.
• Warehousing and logistics at sub-partner’s warehouses
• Last mile delivery directly from sub-partner to customer
• Something else, please explain _______________
viii. Do you have multiple e-commerce vendors partnered for warehousing and
logistics?
we try to understand better about the partnerships done by the logistics partner to
56
• Yes, I have multiple e-commerce vendors for whom I support warehousing
and logistics in my warehouse
• No, I am a dedicated 3rd party logistic partner for an e-commerce vendor
ix. Identify from below options regarding the challenges you have been facing with?
in logistics and warehousing, and it is important to know this because this will direct
the attention of the logistics partner to resolve first rather than pay attention to the
proposed framework. However, it should be noted that the options given to the
respondent in this question will directly relate to the framework/ model
development.
• Adhering to quality while delivering at customer
• Warehousing of materials during festival seasons
• Dynamic warehousing of materials in case of multiple customers
• Adoption of latest technology for real time information and better insights for
dynamic warehousing to increase business share
• Supply chain dilemma for best combination of routing and delivery to
customer
57
making and analysis thereby reducing operating costs
x. Are you using robots and cobots in your warehousing and logistics processes?
[Intent of question]: This question is intended from the purpose to understand the
technology maturity a logistics partner and his team has currently in his supply
chain process. This question gives researcher a view of technology roadmap
logistics partner has prepared.
• No, we are doing logistics manually and we have no intent of upgrading to
cobots and robots
• No, we are doing logistics manually and we intend to use robots/ cobots in 6
to 12 months time
• No, we are doing logistics manually and we are exploring the ROI for our
business to use robots/ cobots
• Yes, we have started using robots/ cobots in our logistics process in last 12
months
• Yes, we have started using robots/ cobots in our logistics process for more
than 12 months now
xi. What is your quarterly investment related to latest technology stacks for AI-ML,
understand the investment pattern of the logistics partner. This response from the
respondent allows researcher to finalize the primary candidate to approach for
58
xii. Which of the following technology stack is already in place within your
organisation?
[Intent of question]: This question is to understand the maturity of the logistics
partner regarding the technology adoption in its organization. This question also
provision the researcher to understand which all logistics partner would be the right
candidate of this research adoption once the framework/ model is developed and
promoted.
customer interest
59
xiii. Which of the following technology stack is your organisation planned to deploy in
next 6 months?
logistics partners who have not yet invested or adopted to the technology as of now,
but are preparing for its adoption in next 6 months. These logistics players are of
interest to the researcher as they are another prime candidate to whom the
framework can be proposed.
customer interest
xiv. Which of the following technology stack is your organisation planned to deploy in
customer interest
60
xv. What is the reason for not investing in technology stacks? (If you have selected
insights to the fact that there are logistics vendors who would have challenges to
adopt the process optimization and technology adoption. Such logistics partners are
prime candidates of this research where a framework/ model is being proposed for
co-sharing/ co-owning of physical infrastructure and the technology along with its
research and investment.
for us
• We have already invested in the tech stacks
xvi. What is your logistics model, do you have partners for logistics process?
[Intent of question]: This question is to ascertain if the logistics partner is taking
full ownership and responsibility of logistics platform and logistics setup.
• No
61
• Yes, we have a 3rd party logistics vendor working with us as a partner
xvii. What is your logistics model, do you have partners for warehousing?
[Intent of question]: This question is to ascertain if the logistics partner is taking
full ownership and responsibility of logistics platform and logistics setup.
• No
• Yes, we have a 3rd party logistics vendor working with us as a partner
xviii. What is your expense in having your own logistics setup?
[Intent of question]: This question is to ascertain the overall cost the logistics
partner is having to setup the logistics and warehouse. The imporatnt aspect here is
how the e-commerce vendor can be a market leader in dynamic pricing by reducing
the total cost of ownership.
• No, we have 3rd party logistics partner managing our logistics
xix. What is your expense in maintaining your logistics by a 3rd party logistics partner?
logistics team in maintaining logistics by a partner. This provides a direct
62
• No, we have our own logistics team managing logistics internally
xx. What is your expense in product delivery by self?


xxi. What is your expense in product delivery by using a delivery partner?
63
xxii. Are you interested in co-ownership or co-shared logistics and delivery model in e-
commerce supply chain for better business and revenue model?
researcher can gauge the amount of logistics partners are aware of this concept or
there is a need to have more informational sessions with the vendors on this
concept.
• Yes, we are interested and we are exploring the opportunities
• Yes, we are interested and our business model is based on same
• No, we are dedicated logistics partner and we are happy not to change the
business model
xxiii. If your answer to above question is (c) then what is the reason you do not want to
use it?
want to gauge the reason as why the logistics partner is not interested in the co-
• Our model is a time tested model and we do not have any strategic plan to
change it
• Our agreement does not allow us to have any other vendor
64
xxiv. If you are planning to go with co-sourcing/ co-ownership model, then what is the
• We expect a saving of less than 5%
• We expect a saving of around 5% - 10%
• We expect a saving of more than 30%
• We do not have enough data to calculate saving %
Questions for Delivery partners
[Intent of question]: This question is to capture the delivery partner name but it is
important to notice that the year of establishment directly relates to the experience
the delivery partner is carrying in this research space. Hence the response from this
delivery partner is equally important to establish the credibility of the process for
quick delivery.
[Intent of question]: This question is to understand the origin of the delivery partner
and this reveals the fact as what would be the base mindset of delivery and supply
65
chain for this vendor. This question allows an insight into how quick the
organization would be adapt to process optimization and technology adaptation.
organization
iii. Which geographical region(s) does your organisation operate on?
[Intent of question]: This question establishes the last mile delivery partner
credentials of his exposure to multi-geography supply chain insights. If an delivery
partner is operating at multiple geographic locations then there are many insights
which can be derived related to operating partners in specific geography, adoption/
• North America
• South America
• Africa
• Europe
• Asia
• Middle East
iv. What was your revenue across the financial years (in terms of million US $)
[Intent of question]: This question is to ascertain the revenue of the delivery partner
delivery partner has risk taking capability while process optimization and
66
v. Does your organisation deal into end-to-end delivery processes of supply chain or
do you have sub-partners associated with you?
cost of ownership is only borne by the delivery partner or is it shared between the
e-commerce vendor and the logistics partners. This question has another view
• We take care of end to end delivery which involves pickup from warehouse/
dark stores to end customer
• We have sub-partners based on locations who are also involved in last mile
delivery
vi. What are the different modes of delivery your organisation deals in?
[Intent of question]: Through this question, researcher is trying to gauge the
maturity of delivery partner in terms of adaption to the technology. The response
will clearly highlight if the delivery is a fully functional manual process or a hybrid
mode of operations between physical delivery boy or a unmanned vehicle.
• Only through physical delivery boys using motor vehicles
• Only through un-manned aerial vehicles
• Only through un-manned road vehicles
• We use delivery boys and un-manned road vehicles
• We use delivery boys and combination of un-manned vehicles
67
vii. Do you have multiple e-commerce vendors/ logistics team partnered for last mile
delivery?
we try to understand better about the partnerships done by the delivery partner to
• Yes, we work for multiple e-commerce vendors as well as logistics &
warehousing organisation.
• No, I am a dedicated delivery partner for an e-commerce vendor/ logistics &
warehousing organisation
viii. Identify from below options regarding the challenges you have been facing with?
in last mile delivery, and it is important to know this because this will direct the
attention of the delivery partner to resolve first rather than pay attention to the
proposed framework. However, it should be noted that the options given to the
respondent in this question will directly relate to the framework/ model
development.
• Finalising the best delivery route to ensure dynamic pickup and drop
• Location and neighbourhood search
• Real time monitoring of delivery boys
• Mapping delivery route - delivery boys against delivery schedules
68
• Timely delivery during bad weather
making and analysis thereby reducing operating costs.
ix. What is your quarterly investment related to latest technology stacks for AI-ML,
understand the investment pattern of the delivery partner. This response from the
respondent allows researcher to finalize the primary candidate to approach for
x. Which of the following technology stack is already in place within your
organisation?
[Intent of question]: This question is to understand the maturity of the last mile
delivery partner regarding the technology adoption in its organization. This
question also provision the researcher to understand which all delivery partner
would be the right candidate of this research adoption once the framework/ model
is developed and promoted.
69
customer interest
xi. Which of the following technology stack is your organisation planned to deploy in
next 6 months?
delivery partners who have not yet invested or adopted to the technology as of now,
but are preparing for its adoption in next 6 months. These last mile delivery players
are of interest to the researcher as they are another prime candidate to whom the
framework can be proposed.
• Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for optimising delivery schedule
with availability of delivery boys
• Integrated digital applications made available to delivery boys and managers
allowing them to see the delivery pickup points, best routes, weather and
traffic information
70
on business optimisation
xii. Which of the following technology stack is your organisation planned to deploy in
• Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for optimising delivery schedule
with availability of delivery boys
• Integrated digital applications made available to delivery boys and managers
allowing them to see the delivery pickup points, best routes, weather and
traffic information
on business optimisation
xiii. What is the reason for not investing in technology stacks? (If you have selected
insights to the fact that there are last mile delivery vendors who would have
challenges to adopt the process optimization and technology adoption. Such
delivery partners are prime candidates of this research where a framework/ model
is being proposed for co-sharing/ co-owning of physical infrastructure and the
technology along with its research and investment.
71
for us
xiv. What is your expense in product delivery by self?
delivery team in maintaining delivery by a partner. This provides a direct

xv. What is your expense in product delivery by using a delivery partner?
delivery team in maintaining delivery by a partner. This provides a direct
72
xvi. Are you interested in co-ownership or co-shared logistics and delivery model in e-
commerce supply chain for better business and revenue model?
researcher can gauge the amount of delivery partners are aware of this concept or
there is a need to have more informational sessions with the vendors on this
concept.
• Yes, we are interested and we are exploring the opportunities
• Yes, we are interested and our business model is based on same
• No, we are dedicated delivery partner and we are happy not to change the
business model
xvii. If your answer to above question is (c) then what is the reason you do not want to
use it?
want to gauge the reason as why the delivery partner is not interested in the co-
• Our model is a time tested model and we do not have any strategic plan to
change it
• Our agreement does not allow us to have any other vendor
xviii. If you are planning to go with co-sourcing/ co-ownership model, then what is the
73
• We expect a saving of less than 5%
• We expect a saving of more than 30%
• We do not have enough data to calculate saving %
3.4 Research Design

The current research is based on quantitative research design, where-in researcher
has used deductive reasoning to prove his hypothesis. Researcher started the research
journey by forming a hypothesis regarding co-ownership and co-sharing of logistics –
warehouse – delivery partner(s) and adopting the latest technology available for optimizing
the operations for better efficiency. Once the hypothesis was formed, researcher collected
data from various stakeholders on basis of online surveys, interviews and case study
researches. Post data collection, the data was analysed to ensure if there are correlations
between the different variables of hypothesis and whether the conclusions prove if
hypothesis is true or false
Hence the research is designed on “Causal-comparative” experimental research
where-in attempts are made to establish cause-effect relationships amongs the different
components of this research. In this research design:
o There is an unknown variable “Quick commerce viability”
74
o There are known variables “end user sentiment on quick delivery” , “pay extra for quick
delivery”, “co-sharing of supply chain services”, “process optimization”, “adoption of
technology advancement”.
By end of this research, based on the collected data from online surveys, interviews,
case studies and data on public environment, the correlation between variables would be
analysed and a relationship between variables would be established. The cause-effect
relationship between variables will lead to an important question on whether the hypothesis
is true or false.
3.5 Population and Sample

This research has four different stakeholders, and the online survey are different for
each stakeholder, and this is the prime reason for the population sample and size to be
different because of the virtue of involvement of each stakeholder in this research. To
calculate the sample size for each stakeholder population we will use the formulae as
below:
𝑍𝑍2 ∗ 𝑝𝑝(1−𝑝𝑝)
𝑒𝑒2
Sample Size = 2
𝑍𝑍 ∗ 𝑝𝑝(1−𝑝𝑝)
1+( )
𝑃𝑃2 𝑁𝑁
Where:
N —> Population Size
Z —> Confidence Score
E —> Margin of Error
P —> Standard Deviation
This formulae will provision the reasearch to calculate the sample size of respondents from
the different stakeholders population based on various parameters like confidence of
75
response from respondent, errors while responding and deviation of results between the
respondents.
Below we discuss population size and sample size of each stakeholder in this
research:
o Online Shopper: This group of stakeholder consists of people who are using online e-
commerce portals on regular basis to make online purchases and form the very
important first segment of stakeholders for this research. Since they are the end users
of e-commerce apps hence, they provide the right sentiment for last mile delivery and
through their response we come to know if there is any demand for quick last mile
delivery of items. Since they are spread across the globe and have a very big footfall,
hence the population size of this group of stakeholders is very large. Having said so, it
is impossible to capture online survey from such a very large pool. Thus, after judicious
thinking the sample population size has been set with the boundary of researcher
connects from his personal and social profile.

Hence to calculate the sample size for particpation of end users we will use the formulae
given above with following values to parameters:
Population size (N) = 500

Confidence score (Z) = 95%
Margins of Error (E) = 5%
Standard Deviation (P) = 50%
Applying the values in the formulae:
(1.96)2 ∗ 0.5(1−0.5)
(0.05)2
Sample Size (ss) = (1.96)2 ∗0.5(1−0.5)
1+
(0.5)2 ∗500
76
Sample Size (ss) = 197 respondents; hence there should be around 197 expected
respondents from the known contacts of the researchers.
o E-commerce vendors: They are the second group of stakeholders with a very important
stake in driving decision for this research. This group is involved in providing the
required base to the end users for creating a demand which then is translated into supply
supported by logisftics, warehouses, last mile delivery partners etc. As per some
research study, there are around 10 million to 25 million e-commerce companies in this
world and there are around 19000 e-commerce businesses running in India. Since the
researcher would not be able to cover all 19000 e-commerce entities of India, hence he
will restrict his circle of research only in the city he lives in which is Pune, Maharashtra,
India. However, during the research it was found that there are more than 1000 e-
commerce companies which are operating in Pune but having legal entities registered
across multiple geographies. So the judicious choice was to limit the e-commerce
vendors to the top 20 players in Pune, India.
o Supply chain partners: This group of stakeholders consists of third party logistics &
warehouse and delivery partners who ensures that the ordered goods reaches the end
customers within agreed timeline and quality delivery. As per the survey from
“EasyLeadz” there are around 870,000 logistics and warehouse companies in the world
and 48,000 of them are operating out of India. Again, as the population size is very big,
it would be impossible for the researcher to connect with all of them hence the
researcher would set up boundary to the place where he lives. Considering the fact that,
there would be a lots of supply chain partners for logistics, warehousing, last mile
delivery hence researcher will setup a boundary of only those partners who work with
those identified 13 e-commerce vendors of Pune, India who has a major share in the
market.
77
3.6 Participant Selection
This research is based on developing a framework/ model for efficient last mile
delivery adhering quality standards and within agreed delivery timelines, hence, there are
various stakeholders who will be respondents to the online survey which is a part of this
research strategy.
The participant selection approach would be as follows:
a. Online Shoppers: They are public at large who are involved in online shopping using
various e-commerce platforms. They form a very important group and with most heavy
footfall. Since their numbers are huge it is important to derive a strategy to decide on
selection of participants. Researcher has decided that he will use his direct connections
in office and society where he lives along with the proffessional social media
LinkedIn. In office and living place, researcher has cherry picked some of the known
acquaintaince who are known to use online shopping while he has created an online
survey and posted it on LinkedIn for anyone to respond. This way, researcher aims to
cater to a large public so that rate of error will be less than 5% and the standard
deivation rule of 50% can be applied to cover large population.
b. E-commerce vendors: It will be very challenging for researcher to reach all the e-
commerce vendors in this globe, hence researcher will analyze the responses from the
online purchaser and based on the target location will pick up the top 15 ecommerce
vendors for further analysis.
c. Logistics and Warehouse partners: Smilar to the approach of e-commerce vendors,
researcher will analyze the logistics and warehouse partners working along with the e-
commerce vendors identified from the response of online purchaser respondents.
78
d. Last mile delivery partners: Smilar to the approach of e-commerce vendors, researcher
will analyze the logistics and warehouse partners working along with the e-commerce
vendors identified from the response of online purchaser respondents.
3.7 Instrumentation
During the research phase, researcher will use online surveys, organization data
publicly available, case study papers to collect data. Researcher has developed online
survey(s) using Google Forms for every stakeholde as discussed in sec 3.6. The online
surveys can be accessed by respondents using the link which is shared on researcher
LinkedIn profile and also given in person to the right stakeholders.
Some screenshots from the online surveys are as below:

Figure-7
End user online survey
Source: Author
79
Figure-8
E-commerce vendor online survey
Source: Author
Figure-9
Third party logistics and warehouse partner online survey
Source: Author
80
Figure-10
Delivery Partner Online Survey
Source: Author
3.8 Data Collection Procedures
Researcher will publish online suveys as mentioned in section 3.7 and all responses
of the respondents will be collected into online Google Forms database (which is accessible
only to the researcher as it is abstracted to view based on authentication) which can then
be exported to Google Sheets, an excel format for analysis and derivations. Apart from the
above, there will be interviews for e-commerce vendors, logistics & warehouse partners,
last mile delivery partners, case studies of the e-commerce organizations. The questions
for surveys (which also would be used in interviews) have been developed so that the right
set of data can be collected from various stakeholders pointing directly to the demand of
proposed theories in the research to fulfilling demand by means of process optimization
and technology adaptation.
Inclusion and Exclusion Crtieria: There will be inclusion and exclusion criteria for this
research which will ensure what target audience will be used for online surveys and this
has been explicitly called out in section 3.6
81
3.9 Data Analysis
Researcher has defined a process to extract data from online surveys and then
reduce data into a story for interpreting data and deriving results out of it pertaining to the
proposed theory of this research. The data analysis process for this research is defined
below:
a. Data Organization: First of all, researcher intends to organize various data received
from the online surveys from different stakeholders. The organization of data is
important from the categorization pespective which will provide a thread of data
knowledge base originating from online shoppers extending to ecommerce vendors
and finally closing at the supply chain partners like 3rd party logistics and last mile
delivery partners.
b. Data Validation: Once the data is organized, it will be validated to ensure that the data
is fulfilling the standards required for this research. Data validation will ensure that
the data is matching the necessary format and will not result into unambiguity during
derivation. Data validation will be done in Excel sheet to ensure that all data are
formatted and ready to yield results.

c. Data Cleaning: During data validation the data anomalies will be found, for example
there can be some null data, there can be same data with different spellings, the same
data type in different format etc. all these data will be cleaned and re-validated.
Cleaning of data would mean removing data anomalies, removing duplicate data,
removing inconsistencies in data and ensuring that data format is correct. To do data
cleaning, researcher will use Microsoft Excel and Python programming code whose
libraries will assist researcher to do data cleaning faster and with accuracy.
82
d. Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA): Once the data cleaning activities are done,
researcher intends to do EDA to find trends within data, correlation between data from
different stakeholders, identifying patterns between data categories, identifying
outliers among data on which deviation and anomaly rules need to be executed. The
EDA process would require Python programming libraries and Excel Analysis feature
to extract the right data relationships.
e. Interpretation of Result: Post EDA, researcher would develop interpretation of data
into visual results which finally will be pointing to support for success or failure of the
theory based on collected data. The results will be done in Excel tool or Python
programming language.
3.10 Research Design Limitations
Researcher acknowledges that this research has some limitations which are as
below:
a. Populations constrained: This research has a very high potential and involves all the
users on this earth involved in online shopping. Researcher has no means to cater to
all these users and hence this research will be constrained on the population for survey.
The population for survey will be restricted to known acquaintainces of researcher or
in the social contact of researcher via LinkedIn.
b. Geography constrained: The researcher has no means to execute this research for all
the geographies where-in users are situated across globe, hence based on the inputs
from the survey, researcher will opt a geography where-in the research can be
conducted.
83
c. Sample size limitations: Due to the limiation in the population size the sample size of
the population for whom the data will be analyzed will also be restricted leading into
sample size limitations.
d. Target audience selection biasness: Researcher believes that there would be a
possibility of selection biasness of target audience based on the fact that the geography
and audience population are constrained.
e. Confounding variables: This research can be prone to confounding variables which
can influence the study of the outcome of result. For example, one of the variable is to
understand intent of online purchaser to pay extra for quick delivery and if not
answered judiciously can sway the entire result to one direction.
f. Measurement errors: Researcher believes that there is a very less chance of

measurement errors in this research because all data (without any biasness metric) will
result into direct relationship of result. However, there are cases like sample size
calculation where-in there can be measurement errors due to wrong formulation.
3.11 Conclusion
The methodology of this research study is based on Quantitative Research analyis

supported by causal-comparative data analysis. The strucuture of data instrumentation is
based on online surveys, in-person interviews, case study reviews and extraction of
organization data available in public domain. The target sample size of the population is
based on various factors like confidence score based on normalized bell curve, margin of
error calculation and standard deviation percentage covering the large population. Data
analysis undegoes various sequential steps like organization of data, validation and
cleaning of data, exploratory data analysis and interpretation of results in various formats
like graphical, tabular and chart based. The entire research methodology has its own
84
limitations which is constrained with geographical location, sheer size of the population,
limitation with the sample size calculations, confounding variables especially with sample
size calculation and any measurement errors.
Having said so, the research methodology supported by research questions,
audience interviews and data analysis are all aligned with final results to setup the
framework for efficient last mile delivery. The data was collected for a period of 11 months
starting from February 2023 to December 2023 where-in around 360 online surveys were
done with 43 interviews of various stakeholders like e-commerce vendors, logistics partner
and last mile delivery partners.
85
CHAPTER IV:
RESULTS
Researchers have used online survey tools, personalized interviews, case study and
corporate website for data collection to support the proposed hypothesis. The questions in
the online survey and interviews differ based on stakeholder type, there are four types of
stakeholders, and each plays an important role in this research.
a. Online Buyer: This group of stakeholders plays a very important role where-in based
on the survey responses, researcher is able to identify if there is a need for quick
delivery and whether the online buyer is also willing to pay more for quick delivery.
The other aspect of the survey is to understand the type of products which an online
buyer would like to be delivered quickly and whether there is any affinity towards
delivery only by humans. The entire hypothesis of research will be futile if there is no
demand for quick delivery by online buyers. The research started with a view that there
would be very few online buyers (apx. 15% to 20%) who will be willing to pay extra
for quick delivery.
b. E-commerce vendor: Post the Online Buyers, next important group of stakeholder in
discussions is e-commerce vendors. While Online Buyers establishes the demand of

quick delivery, it is the e-commerce vendors who form the supply group of quick
delivery. As part of research the author studied 13 e-commerce vendors by means of
questionnaires, common public available data as well as interviews. The e-commerce
vendors studied were:
i. Amazon India
ii. Flipkart
iii. Zomato
iv. Swiggy
86
v. Myntra
vi. BigBasket
vii. Blinkit/ Grofers
viii. DMart
ix. DCathlon
x. Licious
xi. Tata 1Mg
xii. SnapDeal
xiii. Box8
c. Logistics and warehouse partner: As a part of the research study there were thirteen
(13) e-commerce vendors who were selected from the responses given by the online
users, and from the responses provided by e-commerce vendors fifteen (15) logistics
and warehouse partners have been identified for further research on this subject which
are as below:
a. Gati
b. Aramex
c. India Post
d. India Rails
e. Ecom Xpress
f. BlueDart
g. FedEX
h. Delhivery
i. ShadowFax
j. Mahindra Logistics
k. E-Kart
87
l. XpressBees
m. Rapido
n. Porter
o. TCI
d. Last mile delivery partner: As a part of the research study there were thirteen (13) e-
commerce vendors who were selected from the responses given by the online users,
and from the responses provided by e-commerce vendors fifteen (15) last mile delivery
partners have been identified for further research on this subject which are as below:
a. Gati
b. Aramex
c. India Post
d. India Rails
e. Ecom Xpress
f. BlueDart
g. FedEX
h. Delhivery
i. ShadowFax
k. E-Kart
l. XpressBees
m. Rapido
n. Porter
o. TCI
88
The sections in this chapter have questions from the online survey and interviews
arranged by different stakeholders. Every question has a summarized view of the result
captured from online survey in form of data table & data charts and is followed by the fact
whether online survey response supports hypothesis proposed by researcher.
4.1 Research questions for online buyers
Researcher, in this research, has used online survey method for capturing responses
from the online buyers, respectively to understand the demand of quick last mile delivery
and capture sentiments of the online buyer related to type of products required for quick
delivery. The online survey is drafted in such a way that it will capture the interest of online
buyer(s) for quick delivery and their willingness to pay extra for quick delivery. It also
captures the factors like online buyers age group, job type, demography, choice of last mile
delivery method etc. The online survey was conducted via Google Platform and 316
respondents took part in this online survey. In order to maintain anonymity, the researcher
has not captured email address, name and other personal data so that the online buyer
respondents could respond without any prejudice of getting known and identified.
4.1.1 Research Question One: What is your age group?
Through this question, researcher intends to understand the acceptance trend of
online e-commerce platform categorized by respondent's age. From the received 316
responses for this survey, the results depicted in table below highlights that people between
the age group 21 to 40 years form a large share of e-commerce platform users. Through
the survey responses it is evident that respondents of age group between 31 to 40 years
form 37.7% of the respondent's population, followed by the age group of 21 to 30 years
with a share of 31%. On further analysis, it is evident that the age group beyond 40 years
also are strong contributors to the online e-commerce platforms with around 21% share.
89
Analysis of the responses evidently states that e-commerce platform is well accepted at all
age level and the this is a good result for discussion of research results and in support of
hypothesis.
Table-2
Age wise respondents breakup
Age Group Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
Less than 16 years 0 respondents 0%
16 to 20 years 4 respondents 1.2%
21 to 30 years 98 respondents 31%
More than 50 years 31 respondents 9.8%
Total respondents 316 respondents 100%
Source: Author
4.1.2 Research Question Two: Where do you live?
The previous question establishes acceptance of e-commerce platform at all ages,
and this question, intends to analyze the geographical diversity of the respondents. This
analysis will chart the geographical diversity of respondents which will further assist
researcher to zero-in the geography & region for focus of the further research including
targeting the audience from e-commerce vendors, logistics & warehouse partners and last
mile delivery partners. The data provisions researcher to draw a pattern/ trend for online
buyers in different geography and region, and it is a very good data to understand the
regional culture which will be revealed from the survey response data. The analysis on the
geographical breakup will assist researcher to conclude if the framework is good enough
to be horizontally deployed with some tweaks.
Out of 316 respondents, the chart below highlights that around 83.5% respondents
are from India and rest 16.5% respondents were from rest of the world. The other 16.5%
of the respondents are from Germany, United States of America (USA), United Kingdom
(UK), Australia, Croatia, Singapore and Dubai. From the responses it is very evident that
90
majority of respondents are primarily from India, hence the analysis of the responses will
assist researcher to analyze and support the hypothesis from Indian online buyer culture.
Table-3
Respondents Breakup geography wise
Geography Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
India 264 respondents 83.5%
Germany 14 respondents 4.4%
United States of 13 respondents 4.1%
America
Australia 8 respondents 2.5%
United Kingdom 11 respondents 3.4%
Croa�a 3 respondents 0.94%
Singapore 2 respondents 0.63%
Dubai 1 respondent 0.31%
Others 0 respondents
Total Respondents 316 respondents 100%
Source: Author
4.1.3 Research Question Three: Which city and state you live in?
From previous question researcher gets an understanding regarding breakup of
respondents geography wise, and through this question, researcher makes a deep dive to
understand the regional diversity of respondents within the geography. With this set of
information, researcher will compare the trend of online purchases segregated by the
regional diversity as there will be enough data to plot regional diversification of
respondents within the geography and region. One interesting fact which also gets derived
from the respondents data is the market share of e-commerce platforms in a specific region.
The respondents data clearly indicates that the majority of respondents (71.2% of
the population) are from Maharashtra state of India, and so, it would be safe to conclude
that the local culture of Maharashtra state will get reflected in the forthcoming questions.
Hence, it is also prudent to say that the researcher’s mail focus is towards the quick
commerce and last mile delivery in Maharashtra region of India geography.
91
Table-4
Top 5 Respondents Breakup region wise (78% of the respondents)
Region Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
Maharashtra 176 out of 316 respondents 56%
Karnataka 33 out of 316 respondents 11%
New Delhi 14 out of 316 respondents 4%
Bavaria 14 out of 316 respondents 4%
Utar Pradesh 8 out of 316 respondents 3%
Source: Author
4.1.4 Research Question Four: What is your job sector?
Researcher intends to study the job sector of the respondents as there is a belief that
respondents who would be lacking time because of their life style and job would prefer to
use online shopping. This belief will be backed by the respondents data as it will be
evidently clear as researcher is tagging type of job vis-à-vis amount of availability to do
physical window shopping. Hence, if we ponder over the options the people who are in
private job would be preferring more towards online shopping as compared to who is in-
employed or house maker or student. Going forward these respondents also will drive the
rationality of type of products they are inclined to purchase online and also will answer the
base fundamental question, if there is a demand of quick delivery.
In the responses received from the online survey, it is evidently clear that 90.2% of
the respondent are working in private sector job while rest (9.8%) of the other respondents
come from government job, public sector job, house makers, un-employed or student.
Since the responses majority of respondents are from private sector jobs hence it is always
be a safe assumption that the survey response will be swayed more favorable to private
jobs people and their attitude and mindset towards quick commerce.
Table-5
Respondents Breakup job sector wise
Job Sector Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
Private Organisa�on 285 respondents 90.2%
92
Government organisa�on 10 respondents 3.16%
Public taking organisa�on 9 respondents 2.84%
Student 6 respondents 1.89%
House makers 5 respondents 1.58%
Un-employed 1 respondent 0.31%
Source: Author
4.1.5 Research Question Five: Do you use e-commerce for online purchases?
Researcher through this question, intends to filter out those respondents who are
not doing online purchases, because they are not the right audience for this research and it
is prudent that they do not pursue this research study at all. Hence for all practical reasons,
researcher in his online survey exits them from the survey after this question. Since we
have a result of 97.2% respondents are using online e-commerce platforms while 2.8%
respondents does not do online purchases hence the data strongly puts the case of very high
acceptance of e-commerce platforms for online purchases.
In graphical format the response can be viewed as:
Figure-11
Respondents whether they use online purchase platform
Source: Author
93
4.1.6 Research Question Six: What is your average online purchase?
In the last question, online survey segregates the online buyer from not being an
online buyer and now the path forks for those who are using online e-commerce platform
for purchasing their products. From this question, researcher tries to quantify the regularity
of purchases made by the respondents. It is important to know the mindset of online
purchase from the perspective because less frequency of online purchases obviously means
that there is no demand for quick delivery. However, much to the delight of researcher,
there are 30% of respondents who sometimes do no online purchases in some weeks, but
there are 70% of respondents who can be classified as regular online purchasers every week
and within these 70% respondents there are 36% respondents who make more than at least
2 items purchases every week.
Table-6
Respondents average online purchases
Average online purchases Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
Can be none some�mes 91 respondents 29.6%
Less than 2 items / week 103 respondents 33.6%
3 – 5 items/ week 70 respondents 22.8%
More than 5 items/ week 43 respondents 14%
Blank responses 4 respondents 1.3%
Source: Author
4.1.7 Research Question Seven: Which e-commerce platform(s) do you use?
From the previous questions in this online survey, researcher has tried to capture
age, demography and quantified the average purchases done through online platforms,
while in this question, researcher tries to analyze the market share of the e-commerce
vendors and their platforms in the geographical region of the respondents. This question is
important from the research strategy perspective as it will provide right e-commerce
vendors and platform names that should be focused by researcher to study-analyze-
94
document the quick commerce last mile delivery impact. The responses from these e-
commerce vendors and their delivery partners would provision the researcher to formulate
the right framework for quick and efficient last mile delivery.
From the responses of the online survey it is clearly evident that Amazon is leading
within the geography regions of the participants as 292 respondents out of 307 are using
Amazon, followed by, 168 out of 307 respondents using Flipkart, followed by, 156 out of
307 respondents using Zomato. The survey results also highlight that there are many other
local e-commerce vendors which has presence in the geography, however, they are small
e-commerce players with a potential to grow and some of them have gain lots of popularity
as they are trying to do quick delivery but still in couple of hours. These e-commerce
vendors are trying a daunting task of ensuring quick delivery for the perishable items like
vegetables, fruits, meat products etc.
Table-7
Respondents preference of e-commerce vendors and platforms based on survey data
E-Commerce vendor Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
Amazon 292 out of 307 respondents 95.1%
Flipkart 168 out of 307 respondents 51.7%
Zomato 156 out of 307 respondents 50.8%
Swiggy 153 out of 307 respondents 49.8%
Myntra 153 out of 307 respondents 49.8%
BigBasket 87 out of 307 respondents 28.3%
Source: Author
4.1.8 Research Question Eight: What type of products do you purchase from e-
commerce vendors?
Now that through the research the geographical presence of e-commerce vendors
is established based on the online buyer choice, it is important for the researcher to
understand as what type of products online buyers are interested for online purchases. This
data is very relevant to understand and correlate whether the products in demand are real
95
candidates for quick delivery. For example if it is an electronics item researcher is of a
view that it can be delivered in normal business routine but medicine, perishable products
are ideal candidates for quick last mile delivery.
The results obtained from the online survey depicts that clothes top the list for
online purchase and is followed by electronics items then followed by kitchen groceries.
There is also a good demand for fresh vegetables and fruits as well as medicines while we
see that fresh meat and sea food expectation is average from online purchases. This result
also indicates the consumer culture and behavioral pattern of the region from where most
of the respondents are.
Table-8
Respondents preference of products via online purchases
Products purchased online Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
Clothes 253 out of 307 respondents 82.4%
Electronic Items 223 out of 307 respondents 72.6%
Kitchen Groceries 203 out of 307 respondents 66.1%
Fresh vegetables & fruits 153 out of 307 respondents 49.8%
Health care products 150 out of 307 respondents 48.9%
Medicines 117 out of 307 respondents 38%
Children sta�onary & toys 100 out of 307 respondents 32.6%
Fresh meat & sea food 84 out of 307 respondents 27.6%
Source: Author
4.1.9 Research Question Nine: What are the reasons you would leave an e-commerce
vendor?
Through this question, researcher intends to understand and analyze the sentiments
of an online purchaser regarding what would make an online buyer stick to an e-commerce
vendor and what would move the online buyer away from a specific e-commerce vendor.
The two options related to delivery standard and cost of product in the online survey will
also be important from defining the framework.
96
The results of this question shows that all the options have nearly equal weightage
for the online buyers and they can leave an e-commerce vendor on any of these options
provided in the survey. This clearly indicates that e-commerce vendors will face stiff
challenge in the future from perspective of keeping a customer engaged and loyal to its
platform.
Table-9
Respondents reasons for leaving e-commerce vendors
Reasons to leave vendor Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
High price by an e-commerce vendor 219 out of 307 respondents 71.3%
Delivery standard/ adherence issues 218 out of 307 respondents 71%
Issue with returnable processes 193 out of 307 respondents 62.9%
Post sales customer service issues 165 out of 307 respondents 53.7%
Lack of variety of products 139 out of 307 respondents 45.3%
Source: Author
4.1.10 Research Question Ten: What are the reasons you prefer online shopping?
In the last question, researcher gauged the reasons for an online buyer to leave
specific e-commerce vendors, while on the other hand, researcher using this question wants
to establish a connected view of the reasons for an online buyer to prefer online shopping
using online shopping platforms provided by various e-commerce vendors. This question
does not have direct impact to the research but has indirect bearings with the fact as they
would be provide inputs for developing the framework. The response from online survey
indicates that the most important factor for online purchases is the convenience of purchase
from home and then the other reasons are bearing equal weightage where-in online buyers
can compare price between the e-commerce vendors at click of button which is a very
difficult task in the windows shopping culture. The online buyers are also equally keen to
avail discounts and coupons which is more dependent on individual negotiation within
windows shopping culture.
97
Table-10
Respondents reasons for doing online purchases
Reasons to do online purchases Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
Convenience of purchase 282 out of 307 respondents 91.9%
Ease of trial at home 200 out of 307 respondents 65.1%
Avail discounts & coupons 201 out of 307 respondents 65.5%
Price comparisons between vendors 200 out of 307 respondents 65.1%
Source: Author
4.1.11 Research Question Eleven: If your e-commerce vendor provided you the
purchased product in 10 min, will you be excited?
This question in the online survey is very important for research as it actually
quantifies the ratio of online consumers who would create a demand for quick last mile
delivery. Researcher has provided the options in such a way which clearly identifies the
intent of the online buyers for quick delivery. The response data states that 39.7% of the
respondent population is interested in quick delivery of ordered products and there are
equal number of respondents (39.7% share of population) of an opinion that the choice
would differ based on the type of products ordered. It is important to note that there were
negligible respondents who chose the option that they did not bothered at all for quick
delivery which is a very positive sign for this research.
Table-11
Respondents acceptance for quick delivery
Respondents acceptance for qcommerce Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
Certainly interested 122 out of 307 respondents 39.7%
Depends on type of product ordered 122 out of 307 respondents 39.7%
Expect reasonable �me but not quick 61 out of 307 respondents 19.9%
Do not bother at all 2 out of 307 respondents 0.7%
Source: Author
4.1.12 Research Question Twelve: If you had been interested in 10 min delivery, what
products would you prefer to be quickly delivered?
98
In the previous question, researcher based on the survey response establishes that
online buyers are interested to have quick delivery, and with this question, researcher
intends to capture the products which an online buyer would love to be delivered within 10
min. It is an important question for the research as it not only complements the previous
question of whether online buyer would be excited in 10 min delivery if the e-commerce
vendor provides it but also provides the required base for proving the hypothesis of the
researcher.
In the online survey response from the respondents it is found that the online buyers
have unanimously voted for medicines (83.7%) and fresh vegetables and fruits (77.2%) as
ideal type of products for quick delivery which is matching the previous responses and the
thought process of the researcher. Healthcare products has a good standing at 45.9%
followed by Fresh meats at 39.1%. This data is crucial to the hypothesis of this research
while setting up framework for quick delivery.
Table-12
Respondents type of products for quick delivery
Respondents products choice Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
Medicines 257 out of 307 respondents 83.7%
Fresh vegetables and fruits 237 out of 307 respondents 77.2%
Health care products & cosme�cs 141 out of 307 respondents 45.9%
Fresh Meat and sea good 120 out of 307 respondents 39.1%
Electronic equipment 64 out of 307 respondents 20.8%
Everything purchased online 52 out of 307 respondents 16.9%
Source: Author
4.1.13 Research Question Thirteen: Will you be willing to pay extra for a 10-min
delivery?
This question is of very importance to the research as this establishes a connection
between the choice of quick delivery and the willingness to pay extra for this quick
delivery. This question establishes a lot of credibility on the research and ensures that there
99
is a good demand for quick delivery and the e-commerce vendors and last mile delivery
partners should invest in the technology and process efficiency for quick last mile delivery.
In the response from 307 respondents, it has been found that 35.5% of the
respondents are not interested/ willing to pay anything extra for quick delivery but on the
other hand 64.5% are willing to pay extra for quick delivery and this is a very positive
discovery for this research. This data provides the necessary kick start to prove the
hypothesis for this research.
Table-13
Respondents willingness to pay extra for quick delivery
Respondents willingness to pay extra Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
No 109 out of 307 respondents 35.5%
Yes 1% - 4% 93 out of 307 respondents 30.3%
Yes 7% - 10% 20 out of 307 respondent 6.5%
Source: Author
4.1.14 Research Question Thirteen: Which of the facilities below would you like to
have during 10-min delivery model?
This is the final question of the questionnaire where-in researcher is intending to
understand the behavior of online buyer in terms of their expectation of facilities they
would like to receive within quick delivery model. This question is important from the
perspective to understand the type of investment and approach an e-commerce vendor has
to establish to satisfy customer need. From the survey responses it is evident that customer
is more oriented towards safe delivery with quality standards followed by real time tracking
of the ordered products. One of the important fact which has come out from this survey is
that only 11.4% of respondents has selected the option where-in they embark that the
delivery should be only done by the humans where-as 40.7% are open to the fact whether
the delivery is done by autonomous vehicles or robots or even by humans.
100
Table-14
Respondents choice of facilities they want to avail for quick delivery
Facili�es during quick delivery model Total Number of respondents % wise breakup
Interested only in delivery 144 out of 307 respondents 46.9%
Clear communica�on and tracking 189 out of 307 respondents 61.6%
Safe delivery with quality adherence 241 out of 307 respondents 78.5%
Delivery only by humans 35 out of 307 respondent 11.4%
I don’t care if delivery is by humans or 125 out of 307 respondents 40.7%
not
Source: Author
4.2 Research questions for e-commerce vendors
Three hundred seventeen (317) online e-commerce end users responded to the
published online survey, and among the top twenty two (22) individual ecommerce vendors
highlighted by the online buyers, thirteen (13) e-commerce vendors were identified (based
on the share of business greater than 1%) for this specific research. The e-commerce
vendors selected from the responses of end user questionnaires for assessment and research
are as below based on their decreasing share of business (SOB) %:
a. Amazon India
b. Flipkart India Pvt. Ltd.
c. Zomato
d. Bundl Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Swiggy)
e. Myntra Designs Pvt. Ltd.
f. SuperMarket Grocery Supplies Pvt. Ltd. (BigBasket)
g. Blink Commerce Pvt. Ltd. (Blinkit)
h. Avenue SuperMarts Ltd. (DMart)
i. DCathlon Sports India Pvt. Ltd. (DCathlon)
j. Delightful Gourmet India Pvt. Ltd. (Licious)
k. Tata1mg
101
l. SnapDeal
m. Box8
The above mentioned e-commerce vendors were given an opportunity to respond to an
online questionnaire which was curated by the author and his mentor in such a way that
enough information could be derived from the e-commerce vendors regarding the
technology investment and co-sharing model to establish a seamless last mile delivery.
4.2.1 Research Question One and Two: Year of Establishment and Registered Country
The intent of the first two questions is to understand the experience of identified e-
commerce players, respective to Indian geography and market, also, if they are registered
owners of business following the law of lands. From the charts below, we come to know
that the operating experience is huge as couple of organizations are operating in Indian
environment and economy since 2007, and the inceptions has been increasing year on year
witnessing the addition of e-commerce vendors trying to exploit Indian markets for its
share of business in e-commerce and quick delivery for last mile. Since these organizations
are registered under Indian Board of Chamber of Commerce, hence is safe to assume that
they have been very aware of the land of laws and the economic and infrastructure factors
which play a major role in logistics, transportation, and last mile delivery.
102
Figure-12
Organization Establishment Year plotted on the time chart.
Source: Author
Figure-13
Country where the organization is registered.
Source: Author
4.2.2 Research Question Three: Geographical area of operations

Through this question, researcher intends to gauze the location of primary
operations of the identified e-commerce vendors. This question helps the researcher to
understand the expertise of e-commerce operations globally and whether the e-commerce
vendors have access to the best practices which are followed across the globe.
103
The responses received from the e-commerce vendors clearly highlights in the chart
below that the primary geographical location of operations is India and only one (1) e-
commerce vendors also have geographical presence in Middle-East. Hence if we
corroborate the two charts of years of operations and geographical regions presence, it is
safe to assume that, the experience is majorly in Indian Market, hence the responses will
be more attuned towards Indian geography and the results derivation will represent India
market predominantly.
Figure-14
Geographical area of operations.
Source: Author
4.2.3 Research Question Four: What is the Average annual revenue in USD million for
last 5 financial years?
Through this question, researcher intends to find the scale of operations for every
e-commerce organization selected based on SOB% via the online end user survey. The
parameters were based on an average of 5 years annual revenue in USD Millions. The
result has been astonishing as it highlights that the annual average revenue in the last 5
years have been more than 10 million USD for each identified e-commerce organization.
104
This depicts that all these e-commerce vendors have done very well in the last mile delivery
business and they have enough budget to explore different opportunities related to adoption
of technology and observing process of co-sharing of delivery & logistics partner.
Figure-15
Average annual revenue for last 5 years.
Source: Author
4.2.4 Research Question Five: Do you deal in end-to-end supply chain or have partners
associated with you?
Through this question, researcher is trying to understand the operating model of
identified e-commerce vendors for this research. This question is of importance from the
fact that it provides information whether the e-commerce vendor is a solo player for entire
supply chain or it has partnered with some channel partner(s) to take care of logistics,
warehousing and last mile delivery. From the chart below it is evident that most of the e-
commerce organizations around 76.9% have their end to end operations done by
themselves and have channel partners with them, while 15.4% of e-commerce vendors
have outsourced last mile delivery to their partners. It is also interesting to know that there
are around 7.7% of e-commerce vendors who do not have any channel partners involved
but they deal with entire end to end supply chain process.
105
Figure-16
Vendor wise end to end process ownership bifurcation.
Source: Author
4.2.5 Research Question Six and Seven: What stage of e-commerce is your
organization involved in? Which stage of e-commerce do you have channel partners?
These two questions makes a deeper dive to the response received from e-
commerce vendors in last question where-in researcher would like to understand the
contribution of e-commerce vendors for different stages of e-commerce. While curating
the question, researcher provisioned the different options to e-commerce vendors for their
selection(s). Through responses to these options, researcher can gauge on different aspects
of e-commerce operations like:

a. Is the e-commerce vendor involved in the organization online commerce branding
and strategy, or do they have channel partner employed for this?
b. Is the e-commerce vendor involved in sourcing of materials and supply chain or
use channel partners for sourcing of products?
c. Is the e-commerce vendor involved in managing warehouses and logistics or get it
done through third party logistics (3PL) partners?
d. Is the e-commerce vendor involved in Last mile delivery or get it delivered by using
their locale partners?
106
e. Is the e-commerce vendor involved in developing digital solutions using mobile
and web application technologies for better delivery, right product estimation etc
or they have partnered with technology solution companies to get the digital apps
delivered?
f. Is the e-commerce vendor involved in providing market insights and Search Engine
Optimizations or they use the digital marketing partners?
g. Is the e-commerce vendor manage accounting, billing and record keeping or have
they outsourced them to some third party?
h. Does the e-commerce vendor have its own customer care center or have they
outsourced them to some third party?
Figure-17
Stages in which E-commerce vendors are involved in.
Source: Author
107
Figure-18
Stages in which partners of e-commerce vendors are involved in.
Source: Author
4.2.6 Research Question Eight: Identify the challenges as an organization you are
facing with?
Every e-commerce vendor in the supply chain process will face one or the other
challenges regarding online commerce process to execute last mile delivery. In this
question, research author has mapped some important challenges and intends to understand
the percentage ratio of e-commerce vendors who face those challenges. It is important to
note that these challenges are curated by research author to get aligned with the research
theory in question.
The research author intends to understand if challenges faced by e-commerce
vendors are due to Technical Complexity Factors (TCF) or External Complexity Factors
(ECF). The TCF can be managed by adopting to the latest technology advancements and
research done in the domain, while ECF, can only be resolved based on optimizing the
process to make seamless operations and management. Response to this question indicates
that the ECF is more challenging than TCF for these e-commerce vendors in question. The
challenges which author intends to track are:
108
a. Whether the dynamic shift in customer loyalty a challenge for e-commerce vendor?
b. Whether the dynamic price in market a challenge for e-commerce vendor?
c. Is quality delivery adherence a challenge for e-commerce vendors?
d. Is managing customer expectations regarding delivery a challenge for e-commerce
vendors?
e. Is defining the best combination for routing and delivery a challenge for e-commerce
vendors?
f. Is adoption of the latest technology for optimized delivery a challenge for e-commerce
vendors?
g. Is adoption of the latest technology for real time insights and intelligent decision
making a challenge for e-commerce vendors?
h. Is reducing operating cost a challenge for e-commerce vendors?
Response of the finalized e-commerce vendors are in the graph pasted below:
Figure-19
Challenges of an e-commerce vendor.
Source: Author
109
4.2.7 Research Question Nine: Quarterly investment related to latest technology
stacks for AI-ML, robots, digital web apps, reporting & dashboarding etc?
This question is important from the researcher's perspective as he intends to
understand the annual spend an e-commerce vendor has been investing or has the appetite
to invest. On analysis of the chart derived from the response of online questionnaires, it is
very evident that all e-commerce vendors have invested in technology adoption and most
of the e-commerce vendors have ability to invest more than USD 100,000 quarterly. It is
also clear that minimum quarterly investment for technology adoption by the e-commerce
vendors is between USD 10,000 to USD 25,000.
Figure-20
Quarterly investment by an e-commerce vendor.
Source: Author
4.2.8 Research Question Ten: Technology stacks already present in the organization?
This question is complementary to the previous question, where-in after
establishing the quarterly budgetary spent by the e-commerce vendors in previous question,
researcher wants to understand the technology landscape already adopted by the e-
commerce vendors via this question. The questions have been curated by researcher to
observe the response of technology adoption using Artificial Intelligence & Machine
110
Learning (AI-ML) for logistics & warehousing, delivery & routing optimizations, mapping
location wise customer interest, robotics & autonomous drivings. There are question
options to also understand if e-commerce vendors have technology stack for intelligent
analytics & dash-boarding as well as real time notifications.
From the graph below, it is evident that all e-commerce vendors have one or more
technology stacks in their organization. The detailed analysis represents that most of them
have real time monitoring & dash-boarding technology stacks available within their
organisation which is followed by AI-ML based technology stacks for logistics,
warehousing, delivery & routing optimizations. Nearly less than half of the e-commerce
vendors have some technology stacks respective to autonomous driving and robotics.
Researcher intends to understand the technology stacks being employed by the e-
commerce vendors as below:
a. Implementation of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for logistics and
warehouse
b. Implementation of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for identifying
customer wise interest location wise
c. Implementation of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for delivery
operations and routing optimizations
d. Implementation of Robotics and autonomous vehicles (air and road) for last mile
delivery
e. Implementation of Intelligent Analytics and Dashboarding for real time status
f. Implementation of real time notifications based on real time supply chain status
indicators.
111
Figure-21
Technology stack adopted by e-commerce vendors.
Source: Author
4.2.9 Research Question Eleven: Technology stacks e-commerce organization
planning to deploy in next 6 months?
From the last question, researcher will come to know about the technology
landscape, which is present in the e-commerce vendor’s ecosystem, while from this
question, researcher intends to gauge if there are any deployments planned in next six
months using the technology landscape identified in previous question.
As we can see, there is an inclination to setup efficiency in operations by adopting
to technology for seamless delivery operations & routing optimizations as well as
managing logistics and warehouse along with managing efficiency in last mile delivery
operations. The response also indicates that the e-commerce vendors have already
deployed some technology solutions for getting real time insights for intelligent analytics
and understanding location wise customer preferences. Questions asked for responses are
same as of last question.
112
Figure-22
Technology stacks planned to be deployed in 6 months.
Source: Author
4.2.10 Research Question Twelve: Technology stacks e-commerce organization
planning to deploy in next 12 to 18 months?
While in the last question, intent was to understand the technology stacks which
were planned for deployment in next 6 months, this question intends to gauge more on the
technology stacks planned for deployment in next 12 to 18 months. From the responses it
is evident that the focus is being shifted towards implementing robotics and autonomous
driving vehicles for various supply chain and last mile delivery process. Questions remains
same as of the last question.
113
Figure-23
Technology stacks planned to be deployed in next 18 months.
Source: Author
4.2.11 Research Question Thirteen: Reason for not investing in technology stack?
This question is important from the perspective to understand reasons due to which
an e-commerce vendor would not invest much in technology and innovations or efficiency.
The questions asked were:
a. ‘We do not have funds for investing in technology stacks’.
b. ‘We do not have adequate skills to identify right technology stack needed’
c. ‘We are yet to earn our break even’
d. ‘We are already investing’
As we can see from the responses captured, all of the e-commerce vendors claim
that they are already investing to adopt the technology to ensure seamless and efficient
operations for entire supply chain finally leading to last mile delivery.
114
Figure-24
Reasons for not investing in technology adoption.
Source: Author
4.2.12 Research Question Fourteen: What is your logistics model, do you have your
own logistics and warehouse team?
Using this question, researcher is intending to gauge, whether they have
partnerships with third party logistics for logistics and warehouse stages in the entire supply
chain and last mile delivery process. From the responses, we find that around 46% of the
e-commerce vendors have a hybrid model where they also have their operations of logistics
and warehouse and at the same time have partnerships to also execute the same operations
as an extended arm. The second contribution is around 39% where-in the e-commerce
vendors manage their own operations of logistics and warehouses, and, on the other hand
around 15% of the e-commerce vendors have outsourced their logistics and warehouse
processes to third party logistics partners.
115
Figure-25
Operating model of logistics and warehouse
Source: Author
4.2.13 Research Question Fifteen: What is your expense in having your own logistics
warehouse set up?
This question is to understand the expenses made by e-commerce vendors for
operating using own logistics and warehouse team. From the responses we observe that
70% of the e-commerce vendors spend more than $20,000 per quarter, while 16% of the e-
commerce vendors spend between $10,000 to $20,000 per quarter. It is also witnessed that
around 16% of the e-commerce vendors do not have their own logistics setup but have
outsourced the same to third party logistics team.
116
Figure-26
Expenses ratio breakup of managing self-logistics and warehouse
Source: Author
4.2.14 Research Question Sixteen: What is your expense in having logistics
warehouse set up operated by third party logistics partner?
In question 4.2.12, there are around 62% of e-commerce vendors who have
outsourced part or whole of their logistics and warehouse process to third party. Through
this question, we want to know the cost of operations when a third-party logistics and
warehouse partner is involved. From the responses it is evident that 54% of the e-commerce
vendors spend more than $20,000 per quarter while around 8% spend between $10,000 to
$20,000 per quarter.
The responses from question 4.2.13 and 4.2.14 indicate that the cost of operations
using self or using partners for logistics and warehouse are high.
117
Figure-27
Expenses ratio breakup by managing logistics and warehouse by using partners
Source: Author
4.2.15 Research Question Seventeen: What is your product delivery model?
One of the important aspects of this research is efficient & quality adhered last mile
delivery and through this question, researcher intends to know the product delivery model
of these e-commerce vendors. Researcher wants to know whether the e-commerce vendors
do the last mile delivery themselves or they employ third party delivery partners for doing
last mile delivery. Based on the responses, it is clear that around 54% e-commerce vendors
are using hybrid model where they are directly involved in last mile delivery and have also
partnered with the last mile delivery partners. At the same time there are 23% e-commerce
vendors who manage the last mile delivery themselves and on the other hand 23% of the
e-commerce vendors have outsourced their last mile delivery to the last mile delivery
partners.
118
Figure-28
Operating model of last mile delivery
Source: Author
4.2.16 Research Question Eighteen: What is your expense in product delivery using
your own employee and team?
In the last question, once the researcher understands the breakup of e-commerce
vendors regarding the last mile delivery operating model, there is an intent to dig more and
understand the cost of operating model opted in the last question. From the responses we
find out that 77% of e-commerce vendors spend more than $20,000 per quarter irrespective
of the fact if they are doing last mile delivery themselves or using partners or both. Around
8% of the e-commerce vendors are spending between $5000 to $10,000 per quarter and
around 15% e-commerce vendors say they have outsourced.
119
Figure-29
Ratio of cost of operating model of last mile delivery
Source: Author
4.2.17 Research Question Nineteen: What is your expense in product delivery using
delivery partner?
This question is complementary to the previous question where author intends to
know the cost of last mile delivery operations using last mile delivery partners. As we can
conclude from the responses, around 70% of the e-commerce vendors spend more than
$20,000 per quarter while using last mile delivery partners.

Figure-30
Cost of operating model of last mile delivery using partners
Source: Author
120
4.2.18 Research Question Twenty: Are you aware of the concept of co-owned or co-
shared logistics and delivery model in e-commerce supply chain?
This is a very important question from the research perspective as the author wants
to gauge the level of maturity related to co-ownership and co-sharing of logistics and
delivery model in e-commerce supply chain. Hence, author provides following options to
the respondents for their selection:
a. No, we are not aware of it and not interested to know about it
b. No, we are not aware of it and we are interested to know about it
c. Yes, we are aware of it, but we do not want to use it
d. Yes, we are aware of it, and want to work on it in next 6 months time
e. Yes, we are aware of it, and we do not want to know how to start as there are
geographical local players
f. Yes, we are aware of it, and we have started exploring the opportunities in current
geography as well as external geography
g. Yes, we are aware of it and we are in implementation stage
The assessment of the response indicates that around 92% of the e-commerce
vendors are not aware of how the co-ownership and co-shared operating model works and
they are neither interested to go on this road, while 8% of the e-commerce vendors are of
this model in question, but they are not aware of how to start the same.
121
Figure-31
Choice of co-owned or co-shared operating model
Source: Author
4.2.19 Research Question Twenty-one: If your answer to above question is (c) then
what is the reason you do not want to use it?
In the last question, out of various options, if the respondent choses to not use the
co-sharing and co-ownership model even though they are aware of process methodology,
actually arises the interest for next level question which tries to understand the reason
behind it. The various options given to respondent are:
a. Our e-commerce model is time tested model and we do not have any strategic plan
to change it.
b. We have analyzed the cost of co-sharing/ co-ownership, but it is not making much
of difference in cost.
c. It does make sense in terms of cost, but we are not sure of brand security in co-
sharing/ co-ownership model
d. Not applicable to us as we are already doing it
From the responses received by respondents we find that 85% of e-commerce
vendors believe that they have a time tested model and they have no strategy to change the
already working model while 15% of the e-commerce vendors believe that it does make
122
sense to use the model but they are not sure of the security of the brand during co-sharing
and co-owning of the logistics and last mile delivery process.
Figure-32
Reason of not opting for co-owned or co-shared operating model
Source: Author
4.2.20 Research Question Twenty-two: If you are planning to go with co-sourcing/
co-ownership model, then what is the expected amount you will save per quarter?
This final question for e-commerce vendor is to understand if they have developed
any costing model to calculate the expected amount of saving per quarter. Author gave
following options:
a. Less than $1000 per quarter
b. Between $1000 to $5000 per quarter
c. Between $5000 to 10,000 per quarter
d. Between $10,000 to $20,000 per quarter
e. More than $20,000 per quarter
f. I don’t know if we have details as of now
From the responses given all e-commerce vendors have indicated that they do not
have any details as of now.
123
Figure-33
Savings per quarter if chose to go with co-sharing and co-ownership model
Source: Author
4.3 Research questions for logistics & warehouse partners
There were thirteen (13) e-commerce vendors who were selected from the
responses given by the online users, and from the responses provided by e-commerce
vendors fifteen (15) logistics and warehouse partners have been identified for further
research on this subject which are as below:
p. Gati
q. Aramex
r. India Post
s. India Rails
t. Ecom Xpress
u. BlueDart
v. FedEX
w. Delhivery
x. ShadowFax
y. Mahindra Logistics
z. E-Kart
124
aa. XpressBees
bb. Rapido
cc. Porter
dd. TCI
4.3.1 Research Question One and Two: Year of Establishment and registered office
witnessing the addition of logistics and warehouse playing in Indian markets for its share
of business in e-commerce and quick delivery for last mile.
Figure-34
Year wise establishment of Logistics and Warehouse
Source: Author
125
Figure-35
Country of Operations of Logistics and Warehouse
Source: Author
4.3.2 Research Question Three: Which geographical region(s) does your logistics and
warehouse organization operate in?
operations of the identified logistics and warehouse process for e-commerce vendors and
their partners. This question helps the researcher to understand the expertise of logistics
and warehouse operations globally and whether the logistics & warehouse operation people
have access to the best practices which are followed across the globe.
The responses received from the e-commerce vendors and their logistics and
warehouse partners clearly highlights in the chart below that the primary geographical
location of operations is spread majorly across Asia and then followed by Europe, Middle-
East and America. Hence, it is safe to assume that, the experience is majorly in Indian
Market, hence the responses will be more attuned towards Indian geography and the results
derivation will represent India market predominantly
126
Figure-36
Country of Operations of Logistics and Warehouse
Source: Author
4.3.3 Research Question Four: What is your average annual revenue per year for last 5
financial years?
Through this question, researcher intends to understand the financial position of the
logistics and warehouse team of e-commerce vendors or their partners. The understanding
of financial status assists the researcher to analyze the potential of logistics and warehouse
partners capability to adopt to technology innovations, co-own and/ or co-source with other
logistics and warehouse players. From the response of this question we find that 87% of
the logistics and warehouse team were having a revenue of more than $10 million while
13% of the team or partners had a revenue between $1 million and $5 million. Hence it is
safe to assume that most of logistics and warehouse teams and partners are financially
stable to support adoption of technology as well as promote the model of co-ownership
and/ or co-sharing of logistics and warehouse premises and processes.
127
Figure-37
Last 5 years average annual revenue chart
Source: Author
4.3.4 Research Question Five: Does your organization deal with end-to-end logistics
process of supply chain, or do you have sub-partners with you?
This question gauges on the perspective if the logistics and warehouse teams take
care of end-to-end process of logistics and warehouse for the e-commerce vendors or they
have employed sub-partners to carry out logistics and warehouse process of supply chain.
From the response we find that around 73% of the logistics teams take care of end to end
logistics and warehouse process while 20% of the logistics team have also involved sub-
partners to take care of the load of logistics and warehouses at rural areas. It should also be
noted that around 7% of the logistics team have established sub-partners for support during
the main peak season like festivals, new years etc.
128
Figure-38
Ratio of involvement of partners with logistics team
Source: Author
4.3.5 Research Question Six: What warehouse and logistics processes is your
organization involved with?
In the last question, we analyzed the ratio of logistics and warehouse operations
model w.r.t sub-contracting the process to next level of contractors. In this question, we
take a deeper dive to understand the various logistics processes the team operates on. The
options provided were:
a. Warehousing and logistics at self: This would mean that the logistics team is fully
equipped and an expert to manage warehousing processes by themselves. They are

the best candidates to provide end-to-end solution to the e-commerce vendors
whether being an internal department or being an external agency.
b. Managing warehousing and logistics at partners end: This is a very important point
to understand from the fact that the logistics team if managing logistics process at
partners end would mean that not only the process but the systems and validations
would also be followed of the primary or L1 logistics team.
c. Transport facility for pick and drop: Many logistics team would not only manage
warehouse but also manage transportation which would be important from the
129
perspective of local transportation, inter-state transportation and overseas
transportation. This also depicts the overall geography of business.
d. Export and Import: If any logistics team or their partner are involved in export and
import business then it would mean that they are involved in international business
too and have experience of various processes of exporting and importing goods.
e. Last mile delivery to customers: Logistics team if involved in last mile delivery
would mean that they take care of end-to-end supply chain process.
f. Accounting, billing and record keeping: This is a standard process and logistics
team would be having their own accounting and billing team to take care of
accounting transactions.
Figure-39
Warehousing and logistics process with logistics team
Source: Author
4.3.6 Research Question Seven: For what part of logistics process have you partnered?
The logistics process has important processes like warehousing, transportation,
inbound and outbound logistics, yard management and finally last mile delivery. Based on
the response, we find that around 53% of logistics teams do not have partners involved and
130
they are doing of their own. Around 47% of the logistics team have partnered for last mile
delivery which means they have extended their coverage, on the other hand around 27%
logistics team are also involved in managing the logistics and warehouses at sub-partner’s
level.
Figure-40
Partnership breakup by logistics team
Source: Author
4.3.7 Research Question Eight: Do you have multiple e-commerce vendors partnered for
warehousing and logistics process?
Through this question, researcher wants to know if a logistics team is a dedicated
partner for an e-commerce vendor or it is a partner for multiple e-commerce vendors.
Through the response from the logistics team, we find that 93% of the logistics team have
multiple e-commerce vendors for whom they act as third party logistics & warehouse
partners while there are 7% logistics team who are dedicated to one single e-commerce
vendor.
131
Figure-41
Breakup of logistics partnership (dedicated vs multiple e-commerce vendors)
Source: Author
4.3.8 Research Question Nine: Identify challenges you face as a logistics and warehouse
partner?
Logistics and warehousing team has their own set of challenges to take care of, and,
researcher here is interested to understand the challenges the team faces. The intent is not
only to understand the challenges but also to see if the research can provide a set of
solution(s) or framework(s) to solve these challenges via the research output. The options
have been curated to keep in mind that they serve the purpose to provide a response to the
research. The options provided to the team were:
a. Adhering to quality while delivering to customer

b. Warehousing of materials during festival seasons
c. Dynamic warehousing of materials in case of multiple customers
d. Adoption of technology for real time information and insights for dynamic
warehousing
e. Supply chain dilemma for best combination of routing and delivery to customer
f. Adoption of latest technology for faster and safer fulfilment of delivery
g. Adoption of latest technology for real time insights and intelligent decision making
132
As per the response from the various logistics and warehousing team we find that
most of the partners and team apx 93% face challenges in ‘Adhering to quality delivery’
and ‘Setting up best combination of routing and delivery’, and it clearly means that
technology adoption can play a greater role to solve this problem. If we take a look at the
second set of problematic situation, we find that managing ‘dynamic warehousing for
multiple e-commerce vendors’ is a big challenge, followed by ‘technology adoption for
real time monitoring’ and ‘high volume management during festive seasons’. All these
challenges clearly depict that with technology adoption these problems can be removed
and it serves the purpose of the research.
Figure-42
Challenges faced by logistics and warehousing partners
Source: Author
4.3.9 Research Question Ten: Are you using robots and cobots in your warehousing and
logistics process?
This question is important to understand if the logistics and warehouse team have
already adopted to technology innovation respective to autonomous machines which will
133
also involve Artificial Intelligence (AI) – Machine Learning (ML) practices. The question
offers following options to the respondents:
a. No, we are doing logistics manually and have no intent of upgrading to robots and
cobots: Such logistics team are the ones who might have challenges in terms of budgets
or technology leadership etc. and they would not be a prime candidate for this research.
b. No, we are doing logistics manually and have the intent to use robots and cobots in 6
to 12 months’ time: A prime candidate to the research as they are doing the best to
adopt to technology and process to make faster last mile delivery.
c. No, we are doing logistics manually and we are exploring the ROI for our business to
use robots and cobots: These are teams who are still in the process of exploration but
still remains a potential candidate for this research based on the findings they have
about their future strategy approach.
d. Yes, we have started using robots and/ or cobots in our logistics process in last 12
months: A prime candidate to the research as they are doing the best to adopt to
technology and process to make faster last mile delivery.
e. Yes, we have started using robots/ cobots in our logistics process for more than 12
months now: A prime candidate to the research as they are doing the best to adopt to
technology and process to make faster last mile delivery.
The responses from the respondents clearly indicate that one third of the
respondents have intention to induct robots/ cobots in their system in next 12 months.
Similarly, around next one-third of the respondents have already been using cobots/ robots
in their process past 12 months and there is another one-third who either have no intent or
are still struggling at ROI level for inducing robots/ cobots in their process.
134
Figure-43
Acceptance breakup in % for adopting to robots/ cobots in logistics process
Source: Author
4.3.10 Research Question Eleven: What is your quarterly investment related to latest
technology stacks for AI-ML, robots, digital web-apps, reporting & dashboarding etc?
From the last question, researcher gauged about the readiness or acceptance of the
robots/ cobots within various logistics team. In this question, researcher tries to understand
the quarterly investment a logistics team had made to adopt technology related to AI-ML,
robots/ cobots, digital apps, intelligent dashboarding etc. From the responses, it is evident
that 27% of the logistics team have been investing heavily to a tune of more than $100,000
per quarter equally followed by 27% of logistics team having spent between $75,000 and
$100,000 and so on. It is interesting to note that around 7% of the logistics team have
declared that they have not spent any budget on above mentioned technology stacks.
135
Figure-44
Quarterly investment by logistics team on AI-ML technology stack
Source: Author
4.3.11 Research Question Twelve: Which of the following stack is already in place within
your organization?
establishing the quarterly budgetary spent by the logistics team in previous question,
researcher wants to understand the technology landscape already adopted by the logistics
team via this question. The questions have been curated by researcher to observe the
response of technology adoption using Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning (AI-
ML) for logistics & warehousing, delivery & routing optimizations, mapping location wise
customer interest, robotics & autonomous drivings. There are question options to also
understand if e-commerce vendors have technology stack for intelligent analytics & dash-
boarding as well as real time notifications.
From the graph below, it is evident that all logistics have one or more technology
stacks in their organization. The detailed analysis represents that most of them have real
time monitoring & dash-boarding technology stacks available within their organization
which is followed by AI-ML based technology stacks for logistics, warehousing, delivery
136
& routing optimizations. Nearly less than half of the e-commerce vendors have some
technology stacks respective to autonomous driving and robotics.
Researcher intends to understand the technology stacks being employed by the e-
commerce vendors as below:
a. Implementation of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for logistics and
warehouse
b. Implementation of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for identifying
customer wise interest location wise
c. Implementation of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for delivery
operations and routing optimizations
d. Implementation of Robotics and autonomous vehicles (air and road) for last mile
delivery
e. Implementation of Intelligent Analytics and Dashboarding for real time status
f. Implementation of real time notifications based on real time supply chain status
indicators.
137
Figure-45
Technology stack adopted by e-commerce vendors.
Source: Author
4.3.12 Research Question Thirteen: Which of the following stack is your organization
planning to deploy in the next 6 months?
landscape, which is present in the logistics partner ecosystem, while from this question,
researcher intends to gauge if there are any deployments planned in next six months using
the technology landscape identified in previous question.
managing logistics and warehouse along with managing efficiency in last mile delivery
operations. The response also indicates that the logistics and warehouse partners have
already deployed some technology solutions for getting real-time insights for intelligent
analytics and understanding location-wise customer preferences. The questions asked for
responses are same as of last question.
138
Figure-46
Source: Author
4.3.13 Research Question Fourteen: Which of the following stack is your organization
planning to deploy in the next 12 to 18 months?
driving vehicles for logistics and warehouse process. The questions remain the same as of
the last question.
139
Figure-47
Technology stacks planned to be deployed in the next 18 months.
Source: Author
4.3.14 Research Question Fifteen: What is the reason for not investing in technology
stacks?
an logistics and warehouse partner would not invest much in technology and innovations
or efficiency. The questions asked were:
e. ‘We do not have funds for investing in technology stacks’.
f. ‘We do not have adequate skills to identify right technology stack needed’
g. ‘We are yet to earn our break even’
h. ‘We are already investing’
operations for logistics and warehouse process finally leading to last mile delivery. On the
other hand there are 7% of the logistics partner who claim that they do not have adequate
skills to identify the right technology stack which would be helpful for them.
140
Figure-48
Source: Author
4.3.15 Research Question Sixteen: What is your logistics model, do you have partners for
logistics?
Using this question, researchers are intending to gauge, whether they have
partnerships with third party logistics for logistics and warehouse stages in the entire supply
chain and last mile delivery process. From the responses, we find that around 73% of the
logistics and warehouse team do not have extended arm using third party logistics team
while on the other hand around 27% of the logistics and warehouse partners have sub-
contracted for extended support.
141
Figure-49
Partnership model of logistics and warehouse
Source: Author
4.3.16 Research Question Seventeen: What is your expense in having your own logistics
warehouse setup?
This question is to understand the expenses made by logistics and warehouse teams
and partners for operating using own logistics and warehouse team. From the responses we
observe that 87% of the logistics team spend more than $20,000 per quarter, while 7% of
the logistics team spend between $10,000 to $20,000 per quarter and equally spend
between $5,000 to $10,000. So it is safely assume that everyone invests.
Figure-50
Expenses ratio breakup of managing self-logistics and warehouse
Source: Author
142
4.3.17 Research Question Eighteen: What is your expense in managing logistics using
third party logistics partners?
In question 4.3.15, there are around 27% of logistics team who have sub-contracted
part or whole of their logistics and warehouse process to third party. Through this question,
we want to know the cost of operations when a sub-contracting logistics and warehouse
partner is involved. From the responses it is evident that 67% of the logistics team manage
the process by themselves and 27% spend more than $20,000 per quarter while around 3%
spend between $5,000 to $10,000 per quarter.
The responses from question 4.3.16 and 4.3.17 indicate that the cost of operations
using self or using partners for logistics and warehouse are high.
Figure-51
Expenses ratio breakup by sub-contracting logistics and warehouse
Source: Author
4.3.18 Research Question Nineteen: What is your organization product delivery model?
One of the important aspects of this research is efficient & quality adhered last mile
delivery and through this question, researcher intends to know the product delivery model
of these logistics and warehouse teams and partners. Researcher wants to know whether
the logistics team do the logistics and warehouse process by themselves or they sub-
143
contract third party logistics partners for logistics and wareshousing process of last mile
delivery. Based on the responses, it is clear that around 87% logistics team are directly
involved in logistics and warehousing process. At the same time there are 13% logistics
team who have sub-contracted their logistics and warehouse process to third party.
Figure-52
Operating model of logistics and warehouse partner
Source: Author
4.3.19 Research Question Twenty: What is your expense in product delivery by using
In the last question, once the researcher understands the breakup of logistics team
break-up regarding the logistics and warehouse operating model, there is an intent to dig
more and understand the cost of operating model opted in the last question. From the
responses we find out that 87% of e-commerce vendors spend more than $20,000 per
quarter irrespective of the fact if they are doing last mile delivery themselves or using
partners or both. Around 7% of the logistics team are spending between $5000 to $10,000
per quarter and equal 7% of the logistics team are spending between $10,000 to $20,000
per quarter.
144
Figure-53
Ratio of cost of operating model of logistics and warehouse process
Source: Author
4.3.20 Research Question Twenty-one: If you are using a delivery partner, then, what is
your expense in product delivery by using a delivery partner?
This question is complementary to the previous question where the author intends
to know the cost of logistics and warehouse operations using logistics partners. As we can
conclude from the responses, around 27% of the logistics team spend more than $20,000
per quarter while there are 67% of the logistics team who are owning the end to end process
by themselves and have not sub-contracted to the partners.

Figure-54
Source: Author
145
4.3.21 Research Question Twenty-two: Are you interested in co-ownership or co-shared
logistics and delivery model in e-commerce supply chain for better business and revenue
model?
a. Yes we are interested and we are exploring the opportunities
b. Yes, we are interested and our business model is based on the same
c. No, we are dedicated logistics partner and we are happy not to change the business
model
The assessment of the response indicates that around 60% of the logistics team are
interested while 40% are not willing to change their model as they are dedicated logistics
partner to e-commerce vendors. Out of these 60%, around 20% of the logistics team claim
that their business model already incorporates the co-sharing and co-owning model.
Figure-55
Source: Author
146
4.3.22 Research Question Twenty-three: If your answer to above question is (c) then
a. Our model is time tested model and we do not have any strategic plan to change it.
d. We are investing in co-sharing
From the responses received by respondents we find that 40% of logistics partners
believe that they have a time tested model and they have no strategy to change the already
working model while 33% of the logistics partners believe that it does make sense to use
the model but they are not sure of the security of the brand during co-sharing and co-owning
of the logistics and last mile delivery process. At the same time, interesting fact is that there
are 27% of the logistics partners who are already co-sharing.
147
Figure-56
Source: Author
4.3.23 Research Question Twenty-four: If you are planning to go with co-sourcing/
This final question for e-commerce vendor is to understand if they have developed
any costing model to calculate the expected amount of saving per quarter. Author gave
following options:
a. Less than $1000 per quarter
b. Between $1000 to $5000 per quarter
c. Between $5000 to 10,000 per quarter
d. Between $10,000 to $20,000 per quarter
e. More than $20,000 per quarter
f. I don’t know if we have details as of now
From the responses given 87% of logistics partners have indicated that they do not
have any details as of now. On the other hand there are 7% of logistics partners who are
investing around $20,000 per quarter and equal 7% of logistics partners are investing
between $1000 to $5000 per quarter on co-sharing and co-owning.
148
Figure-57
Source: Author
4.4 Research questions for delivery partner
There were thirteen (13) e-commerce vendors who were selected from the
responses given by the online users, and from the responses provided by e-commerce
vendors fifteen (15) delivery partners have been identified for further research on this
subject which are as below:
a. Gati
b. Aramex
c. India Post
d. India Rails
e. Ecom Xpress
f. BlueDart
g. FedEX
h. Delhivery
i. ShadowFax
k. E-Kart
149
l. XpressBees
m. Rapido
n. Porter
o. TCI
witnessing the addition of logistics and warehouse playing in Indian markets for its share
of business in e-commerce and quick delivery for last mile.
Figure-58
Year wise establishment of Delivery Partners
Source: Author
150
Figure-59
Country of Operations of Delivery Partners
Source: Author

operations of the identified last mile delivery partners. This question helps the researcher
to understand the expertise of delivery operations globally and whether the partners have
access to the best practices which are followed across the globe.
The responses received from the delivery partners clearly highlights in the chart
below that the primary geographical location of operations is India and have thin presence
in North America, South America, Africa, Europe and Middle East. Hence if we
corroborate the two charts of years of operations and geographical regions presence, it is
safe to assume that, the experience is majorly in Indian Market, hence the responses will
be more attuned towards Indian geography and the results derivation will represent India
market predominantly.
151
Figure-60
Geographical area of operations.
Source: Author
financial years?
Through this question, researcher intends to understand the financial position of the
delivery team of e-commerce vendors or their partners. The understanding of financial
status assists the researcher to analyze the potential of delivery partners capability to adopt
to technology innovations, co-own and/ or co-source with other last mile delivery partners.
From the response of this question we find that 93% of the delivery partners were having
a revenue of more than $10 million while 7% of the team or partners had a revenue between
$1 million and $5 million. Hence it is safe to assume that most of last mile delivery teams
and partners are financially stable to support adoption of technology as well as promote the
model of co-ownership and/ or co-sharing of logistics and warehouse premises and
processes.
152
Figure-61
Last 5 years average annual revenue chart
Source: Author
4.4.4 Research Question Five: Does your organization deal with end-to-end delivery
process of supply chain, or do you have sub-partners associated with you?
This question gauges on the perspective if the last mile delivery teams take care of
end-to-end process of last mile delivery for the e-commerce vendors or they have employed
sub-partners to carry out final delivery process of supply chain. From the response we find
that around 73% of the delivery teams take care of end to end logistics and warehouse
process while 27% of the delivery team have also involved sub-partners to take care of the
load of last mile delivery at rural areas.
153
Figure-62
Ratio of involvement of partners with last mile delivery team
Source: Author
4.4.5 Research Question Six: What are the different modes of delivery your
organization deal in?
In the last question, we analyzed the ratio of last mile delivery operations model
w.r.t sub-contracting the process to next level of contractors. In this question, we take a
deeper dive to understand the various delivery processes the team operates on. The options
provided were:
a. Only through physical delivery boys using motor vehicles
b. Only through un-manned aerial vehicles
c. Only through un-manned road vehicles
d. We use delivery boys and un-manned road vehicles
e. We use delivery boys and combination of un-manned vehicles
It is very clear from the response that 100% of the last mile delivery team are using
delivery boys using motor-vehicles to ensure physical delivery. There is no mention of any
un-manned vehicle (aerial or road) for last mile delivery.
154
Figure-63
Various delivery modes used by last mile delivery team.
Source: Author
4.4.6 Research Question Seven: Do you have multiple e-commerce vendors/ logistics
team partnered for warehousing and logistics?
Through this question, researcher wants to know if a delivery team is a dedicated
partner for an e-commerce vendor/ logistics partner or it is a partner for multiple e-
commerce vendors/ logistics team. Through the response from the delivery team, we find
that 87% of the delivery team have multiple e-commerce vendors for whom they act as last
mile delivery partners while there are 13% logistics team who are dedicated to one single
e-commerce vendor or logistics team.
155
Figure-64
Breakup of last mile delivery partnership (dedicated vs multiple e-commerce vendors)
Source: Author
4.4.7 Research Question Eight: Identify from below options regarding the challenges
you have been facing with?
Delivery team has their own set of challenges to take care of, and, researcher here
is interested to understand the challenges the team faces. The intent is not only to
understand the challenges but also to see if the research can provide a set of solution(s) or
framework(s) to solve these challenges via the research output. The options have been
curated to keep in mind that they serve the purpose to provide a response to the research.
The options provided to the team were:
a. Finalizing the best delivery route to ensure dynamic pickup and drop
b. Location and neighborhood search
c. Real time monitoring of delivery boys
d. Mapping delivery route – delivery boys against delivery schedules
e. Timely delivery during bad weathers
f. Adoption to latest technology for faster and safe delivery fulfilment
g. Adoption to latest technology for real time insights for intelligent decision making and
analysis to reduce operating cost
156
As per the response from the various delivery teams we find that 100% of the
partners and team face challenges in ‘Timely delivery during bad weather’ and it clearly
means that technology adoption can play a greater role to solve this problem. If we take a
look at the next sets of problematic situation, we find that managing ‘location and
neighborhood search’ and ‘optimizing delivery route and mapping delivery boys’ is a big
challenge, followed by ‘real time monitoring’. All these challenges clearly depict that with
technology adoption these problems can be removed and it serves the purpose of the
research.
Figure-65
Challenges faced by last mile delivery partners
Source: Author
4.4.8 Research Question Nine: What is your quarterly investment related to latest
technology stacks for AI-ML, robots, digital web apps, reporting & dashboarding etc?
From the last question, researcher gauged the readiness or acceptance of the robots/
cobots within various delivery team. In this question, researcher tries to understand the
quarterly investment a last mile delivery team had made to adopt technology related to AI-
ML, robots/ cobots, digital apps, intelligent dashboarding etc. From the responses, it is
157
evident that 27% of the delivery team have been investing heavily to a tune of more than
$100,000 per quarter equally followed by 13% of delivery team having spent between
$75,000 and $100,000 and so on. It is interesting to note that 40% of the delivery team
spend between $50,000 to $75,000 per quarter and there are no last mile delivery partners
who have not spent any budget on above mentioned technology stacks.
Figure-66
Quarterly investment by last mile delivery team on AI-ML technology stack
Source: Author
4.4.9 Research Question Ten: Which of the following technology stack is already in
place within your organization?
establishing the quarterly budgetary spent by the last mile delivery partners in previous
question, researcher wants to understand the technology landscape already adopted by the
delivery partners via this question. The questions have been curated by researcher to
observe the response of technology adoption using Artificial Intelligence & Machine
Learning (AI-ML) for logistics & warehousing, delivery & routing optimizations, mapping
location wise customer interest, robotics & autonomous driving’s. There are question
158
options to also understand if e-commerce vendors have technology stack for intelligent
analytics & dash-boarding as well as real time notifications.
From the graph below, it is evident that all logistics have one or more technology
stacks in their organization. The detailed analysis represents that most of them have real
time monitoring & dash-boarding technology stacks available within their organization
which is followed by AI-ML based technology stacks for logistics, warehousing, delivery
& routing optimizations.
Researcher intends to understand the technology stacks being employed by the last
mile delivery partners as below:
a. Implementation of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for optimizing
delivery schedule with availability of delivery boys
b. Integrated digital apps made available to delivery boys and managers to see the
delivery pickup points.
c. Implementation of Robotics and autonomous vehicles (air and road) for last mile
delivery
d. Implementation of Intelligent Analytics and Dashboarding for real time status
e. None of the above
159
Figure-67
Technology stack adopted by last mile delivery partners.
Source: Author
4.4.10 Research Question Eleven: Which of the following stack is your organization
planning to deploy in the next 6 months?
landscape, which is present in the delivery partner ecosystem, while from this question,
researcher intends to gauge if there are any deployments planned in next six months using
the technology landscape identified in previous question.
managing efficiency in last mile delivery operations. The response also indicates that the
delivery partners have already deployed some technology solutions for getting real-time
insights for intelligent analytics and real time status updates. The questions asked for
responses are same as of last question.
160
Figure-68
Source: Author
4.4.11 Research Question Twelve: Which of the following stack is your organization
planning to deploy in the next 12 to 18 months?
driving vehicles for logistics and warehouse process. The questions remain the same as of
the last question.
161
Figure-69
Technology stacks planned to be deployed in the next 18 months.
Source: Author
4.4.12 Research Question Thirteen: What is the reason for not investing in technology
stacks?
an logistics and warehouse partner would not invest much in technology and innovations
or efficiency. The questions asked were:
a. ‘We do not have funds for investing in technology stacks’.
b. ‘We do not have adequate skills to identify right technology stack needed’
c. ‘We are yet to earn our break even from our business’
d. ‘We are already investing in the technology stacks’
As we can see from the responses captured, all of the delivery partners claim that
they are already investing to adopt the technology to ensure seamless and efficient
operations for last mile delivery process. On the other hand there are 7% of the delivery
partner who claim that they do not have funds to invest in the technology adoption.
162
Figure-70
Source: Author
4.4.13 Research Question Fourteen: What are your expenses in product delivery by
self?
This question is to understand the expenses made by delivery partners and teams
for operating using own last mile delivery team. From the responses we observe that 100%
of the delivery team spend more than $20,000 per quarter.
Figure-71
Expenses ratio breakup of managing self-delivery to last mile
Source: Author
163
4.4.14 Research Question Fifteen: If you have one, then what is your expense in
managing the logistics by a 3rd party delivery partner?
This question is complementary to the previous question where the author intends
to know the cost of last mile delivery operations using delivery partners. As we can
conclude from the responses, around 13% of the delivery team spend more than $20,000
per quarter and equally 13% spend between $10,000 to $20,000 per quarter while there are
67% of the logistics team who are owning the end to end process by themselves and have
not sub-contracted to the partners.
Figure-72
Source: Author
4.4.15 Research Question Sixteen: Are you interested in co-ownership or co-shared
logistics and delivery model in e-commerce supply chain for better business & revenue
model?
164
a. Yes we are interested and we are exploring the opportunities
b. Yes, we are interested and our business model is based on the same
c. No, we are dedicated delivery partner and we are happy not to change the business
model
The assessment of the response indicates that around 60% of the delivery team are
interested while 40% are not willing to change their model as they are dedicated delivery
Figure-73
Source: Author
4.4.16 Research Question Seventeen: If your answer to above question is (c) then
165
a. Our model is time tested model and we do not have any strategic plan to change it.
From the responses received by respondents we find that 47% of delivery partners
are 13% of the delivery partners who claim that they have done their studies but they do
not find a cost benefit out of this model.
Figure-74
Source: Author
166
4.4.17 Research Question Eighteen: If you are planning to go with co-sourcing/ co-
ownership model, then what is the expected amount you will save per quarter?
This final question for delivery partner is to understand if they have developed any
costing model to calculate the expected amount of saving per quarter. Author gave
following options:
a. We expect a saving of less than 5%
b. We expect a saving of around 5% - 10%
c. We expect a saving of around 11% - 20%
d. We expect a saving of around 21% - 30%
e. We expect a saving of more than 30%
f. We do not have enough data to calculate saving%
From the responses given 73% of delivery partners have indicated that they do not
have any details as of now. On the other hand there are 7% of delivery partners who are
expecting benefits between 21% - 30% per quarter and 20% of delivery partners believe
that they could make a saving of 11% - 20% per quarter on co-sharing and co-owning.
Figure-75
Source: Author
167
4.5 Summary of Findings
This research has four (4) stakeholders and each stakeholder’s findings are as
below:
a. Online Buyers: As discussed earlier, they are critical to this research as they are the
ones who define the demand part of this research. If there is no demand from this user
group the entire research goes in vain. From the responses received by this user group
based on the questionnaires, they have established a very great credibility to the
demand of quick and quality delivery. The summary of findings for online buyer are
as below:
i. Most of the participants were from age group 21 to 40 years old comprising of
68% of the participation user base. It was also interesting to find out that 21% of
the respondents were from 41 to 50 years of age group.
ii. It is also clear from the respondents group that 79% of them are Indian residents
while rest 11% are from various countries like Australia, US, Europe etc.
iii. Amazon is one of the preferred online e-commerce vendor but there are many
other local e-commerce vendors playing substantial role to promote online quick
commerce. Major purchases are clothes (contributing to 83%), medicines

(contributing to 73%), groceries (contributing to 67%) apart from other items.
iv. Very important finding is that the online buyer is not concerned about how the
deliveries are done whether they are physical delivery boys or un-manned
vehicles, however they are (contributing to 64%) willing to pay extra for quick
and quality delivery. This is supporting the research idea as it generates the
demand of this research.
168
b. E-commerce vendors: They are second level stakeholders of this research, and the
responses received from them assist the researcher to take a decision whether the
proposed theory for co-ownership and technology adoption is on the right track or not.
The summary of the findings from the responses are as follows:
i. All the e-commerce companies who participated in the responses are registered in
India and have a high extensive experience starting from 2007 onwards. This means
that the e-commerce vendors have great experience in Indian market and they
understand the law of land very well.
ii. Average annual revenue of the responding e-commerce vendors is greater than $10
million and hence it is safe to assume that these e-commerce vendors have enough
potential for IT spend and adopt to technology advancements.
iii. On analyzing the responses it has been found that, around 47% of the e-commerce
vendors are spending more than $100,000 per quarter while around 38% of the e-
commerce vendors are spending in the range of $50,000 to $100,000 per quarter.
The data indicates that e-commerce vendors are curently investing and have apetite
to invest for adopting innovative technologies for better operations and gaining
market edge.
iv. In continuation to the previous point, it has been analyzed from the responses, that,
in next 6 months the e-commerce vendors intends to optimize delivery & routing
efficiency along with intelligent analytics. At the same time, it is also found that, in
next 18 months e-commerce vendors intends to innovate and deploy autonomous
v. While analyzing operating model of the e-commerce vendors, it is realized that
around 47% of ecommerce vendors have hybrid operating model where they are
169
involved in end to end supply chain and they have partners to manage logistics,
warehouse and last mile delivery.
vi. Coming to important question, on analysis of the responses it is found that 92% of
the e-commerce vendors are aware of co-souring/ co-ownership model but they do
not have full operating model defined as of yet and it will take time.
c. Logistics and Warehouse partners: An important party in this research responsible for
managing logistcs and warehouse for e-commerce supply chain. The responses from
the logistics and warehouse partners plays an important role to understand adoption
acceptance of the the theory for this dissertation. Summary of findings are as below:
i. All logistics and warehouse partners are registered in India and having inception
since 1853. This clearly means that they have a wide range of experience and
business expertise within India, at the same time they too have operational
experience in Europe, Middle-East, North America, South America.
ii. Around 87% of the logistics partner have average annual revenue of greater than
$10 million as analyzed for 5 years while rest 13% average annual revenue for 5
years ranges between $1 million to $5 million. This analysis indicates that logistics
and warehouse partners have capacity to invest in technology advancements.
iii. From the operating model perspective 74% of the logistics and warehouse partners
take care of end to end logistics for the e-commerce vendors. Around 20% of
logistics partners have active sub-partners to take care of supply chain and around
6% have sub-partners only in case when there is a peak of logistics requirement.
iv. Regarding challenges the most important challenge is to ‘adhere quality while
delivery’ and ‘defining best combination of routing & delivery’. The imporatnt
170
challenges are ‘managing warehousing process during peak load’ and ‘adopting to
technology for better operating efficiency’.
v. It is analyzed that around 93% of logistics partner are already investing in
technology stacks adoption. Within 6 months logistics partners intend to adopt
technology pwhich will solve ‘delivery poperations & routing combination’
problems and ‘providing real time insights for intelligent analysis & decision’. On
the othe had in next 18 months, logistics partners intend to invest in autonomous
vi. Responses also reveal that 73% of logistics team take care of the entire logistics
process by self while 27% have employed third-party logistics (3PL) as their
partners. Out of these 73% logistics partners there are 87% partners who spend
more than $20,000 per quarter in managing logistics process.
vii. Regarding co-ownership data analysis we find that 60% of logistics team are
interested to explore co-sourcing and/or c-ownership model while 40% are not
interested as they are dedicated logistics partner, and are not willing to change the
already time tested model. Further analysis, indicates the main reason of not
changing the existing model is that they are not sure of security of data and/ or
brand and also have not defined strategy towards co-ownership model.
viii. However, on the other hand ouy og 60% logistics partners who are interested to
explore, 27% partners are already have analyzed and around 14% of the partner
believe that they will have a saving between $5,000 and $20,000 per quarter, while
87% do not have any data on savings.
d. Last mile delivery partners: An important party in this research responsible for
managing last mile delivery for e-commerce supply chain. The responses from the
171
delivery partners plays an important role to understand adoption acceptance of the the
theory for this dissertation. Summary of findings are as below:
i. All delivery partners are registered in India and having inception since 1854. This
clearly means that they have a wide range of experience and business expertise
within India, at the same time they too have operational experience in Europe,
Middle-East, North America, South America.
ii. Around 93% of the last mile delivery partner have 5 years average annual revenue
of greater than $10 million while rest 7% have 5 years average annual revenue
ranging between $1 million to $5 million. This analysis indicates that delivery
partners have capacity to invest in technology advancements.
iii. Analysis of the operating model depicts that 73% of the delivery partner takes care
of end to end delivey which means pickup from warehouse/ fulfillment center/ dark
stores and delivering to end customer. On the other hand 27% of the delivery
partners have sub-partners for assisting last mile delivery. All these 100% partners
deliver only through delivery boys phycisally using motor vehicles. It is also noted
that 87% of the delivery partners are associated with multiple e-commerce vendors.
iv. On analyzing the challenges, all delivery partners face challenge in ‘maintaining
time during bad weather’. Also, there are other challenges like ‘Neighbourhood &
area search’, ‘finding best delivery route’, and ‘real time monitoring’. It is to be
noted that delivery partners believe that 'Adoption to the technolog’ is not a major
challenge in their line of business.
v. Technology adoption analysis states that 27% of delivery partners has quarterly
investment of more than $100,000, while 53% of delivery partners have quarterly
investment between the range of $50,000 and $100,000 and rest 20% delivery
partners have quarterly investment between the range of $25,000 and $50,000.
172
Hence it is a safe assumption that every delivery partner is in a position to invest
and adopt technology enhancements. Continuing on the same topic, delivery
partners, in next 6 months, intend to invest on integrated digital applications for
delivery boys to view delivery pick-up points. On the other hand, delivery partners
in next 18 months intends to implement autonomous vehicles for last mile delivery.
vi. In terms of co-sourcing/ co-ownership model, it is found that 60% of the delivery
partrners are interested and in-fact 33% among them have their model adapted to
co-sourcing. The rest 40% delivery partners are not willing to go for co-sourcing
model and they have their own reasons like ‘operating model is time-tested and do
not intend to change’, ‘not sure of brand security’, ‘have not checked the benefits
in terms of monetary’. It is interesting to note that 73% of delivery partners have
not done any analysis and hence have no data on savings but 27% of the delivery
partners have indicated that they foresee a saving between 11% to 30% in operating
cost which is a big saving.
4.6 Conclusion
From the analysis it is very evident that there is a dmenad of quick delivery and
aournd 64% of the online buyers are willing to pay extra. Hence it is a great start for the
research and it obviously means that research has a potential to develop a framework to
support this demand. At the same time, the other stakeholders like e-commerce vendors,
logistics & warehouse partners and last mile delivery partners have displayed great interest
in investing for latest technology adoption. They also have a 6-18 months plan for adopting
various technology stack in order to solve their business problems or complex scenarios. It
is also clear that there is a dire need for co-sourcing & co-ownership as well as adoption to
technology to share the cost of operations, recuce the entry cost in the market, horizontal
173
acceptance of the technology stack as all stakeholders might not have high investing
capability.
With all the above points in front of us, it is now the right time to develop the
framework as an output of the research.
174
CHAPTER V:
DISCUSSION
5.1 Discussion of Results
This section for discssion of results is sub-divided into four sections (a) Online
Buyer (b) E-commerce vendors (c) Logistics and Warehouse Partners (d) Delivery
Partners. In each section, author would interpret and describe about the results obtained
from the online survey as well as interviews conducted.
This research subject is applicable to entire world involving all the countries on
earth, however the researcher does not have capacity and capability to cover the entire user
base of earth, hence the stakeholdes has been selected keeping in mind the capacity and the
capability of the researcher. For ‘Online Buyers’, researcher has used its social group and
invited around 400 acquaintances using neighbours, relatives, friends, colleagues and via
social media like ‘LinkedIn’. Responses were seeked using an online survey which was
posted in LinkedIn and couple of users were invited personally by sending link to their
WhatsApp. There were responses from 317 from the online buyers which were analyzed
and out of those responses top 15 e-commerce vendors (with having at least 3% of market)
were shortlisted for research. These 15 e-commerce vendors provided the list of logistics
and delivery partners in their surveys which were then taken up for research subsequently.
The next sections discusses the results of every questions in the questionnaire which
was given to various stakeholders. However, this comes with an underlying statement that
the study is mainly focused on India market and the other external markets should be taken
up for forthcoming research.
175
5.2 Discussion of Research Results for Online Buyers
In this section we will discuss the responses received from the online buyers. These
are the stakeholders who are consumers of the online commerce and they define the real
requirements of the online commerce.
5.2.1 Research Question One: What is your age group?
On the basis of data collected from the online survey responses, we find that most
of the respondent population is from the age group 31 to 40 years (participation rate
37.7%), which is followed by 21 to 30 years (participation rate 31%), and then followed
by respondent age group of 41 to 50 years (participation rate 20.3%). Hence it is safe to
say that respondents from the age group 21 to 50 years collectively form participation rate
of 89%. Actually, the result corroborates with the fact that the researcher had used his
social groups like ‘Office colleagues’, ‘Neighbors’, ‘Relatives’ and ‘LinkedIn social
media’. The respondent age group less than 21 years and greater than 50 comprises 11%
of the respondent’s sample population.
One important derivation from respondents is that e-commerce and online shopping
is widely accepted by all age-groups, and this is really good data for discussion of research
results and supports the hypothesis proposed by researcher.
5.2.2 Research Question Two and Three: Where do you live (Country, State and City)?
The intent of researcher is also to understand the demography from where the
respondents of the questionnaire come from. This is important from various aspects as
below:
a. Based on the majority of respondents’ location, it will be safely assumed that the
dynamics of research will be based for that geographical location.
b. On comparing with the previous age group question, researcher will get an idea about
the age group of respondents vis-à-vis location spread.
176
The results clearly indicate that around 84% of the respondents are from India, and
hence, it is safe to assume that the research will primarily be tilted towards India market.
The rest 16% are varied across geography and are belonging to primarily Germany (4.4%),
followed by USA (4.1%), followed by U.K. (3.4%) and then Australia (2.5%). There are
other countries like Dubai, Croatia etc. which comprises of less than 1.5%. This data
actually makes sense because the researcher currently is living in India and so most of his
acquaintance is from India. Researcher works for a German Automotive giant and so the
German office colleagues have responded, and so is the participation from colleagues
operating out of U.S, U.K. and Australia.
If we drill to the next question, we get a fair understanding of regional breakup of
states and cities via the data collected from the responses. We find that respondents are
majorly from Maharashtra state with a whopping share of 67% followed by Karnataka at
12% and New Delhi trailing at 5% while other states with share of 1% or 2% or 3%
participation (table reference below).
Table-15
Table depicting participation % age-wise and state wise
Source: Author
177
5.2.3 Research Question Four: What is your job sector?
This question is to understand which job sectors are primarily the users of online
commerce, and we find that around 90% of the respondents are from ‘Private Organization’
while the other sectors are very small contributors to the entire response. It can also be seen
that in private organization sector the age group is variate starting from 21 years and going
beyond 50 years. The primary contribution from age perspective is in between 31 to 40
years of respondents.
Table-16
Table depicting job sector contribution % vs participation % age-wise
Source: Author
5.2.4 Research Question Five and Six: What are your average online purchases and
which e-commerce platform(s) do you use?
On assessing the responses from the respondents, it is very evident that around 37%
of the respondents make more than 3 online purchases per week while 63% of the
respondents make less than 2 online purchases in a week. Hence, it is safe to assume that
there is a strong acceptance of online purchases and there is no longer a need to prove this
point. We also understand that the first choice of respondents for making online purchases
is Amazon as 95% of respondents are using Amazon for their online purchases followed
by Flipkart, Zomato etc. We see that there are many e-commerce players based out of
regions which means that there are small local e-commerce vendors who are also playing
an important role in e-commerce. This is a great area of interest for the researcher to
understand if these local/ regional e-commerce vendors are well budgeted to counter the
178
force which bigger players like Amazon, Flipkart, Myntra, Zomato, Swiggy etc. bring onto
the table. It will also be an interesting thing to witness and conclude if the regional players
would like to partner among themselves and share the resources to make an edge in the
market.
5.2.5 Research Question Seven and Eight: What type of products do you purchase from
online e-commerce vendors and reasons to prefer online shopping?
On analyzing these two questions, we can see a trend of change from window
shopping to online shopping. We see that buyers are looking for convenience to shop from
their place at the luxury of their time. Around 92% of the users have chosen convenience
as the top factor of their motivation to do online shopping rather than windows shopping.
They also give credit to discounts and offers (around 66% of respondents chose this)
available in online shopping and the ease of comparing prices of the products among
various e-commerce platforms. If we look at it critically, we find these reasons are very
genuine as it would be difficult to obtain all these facilities in windows shopping.
The analysis takes a deeper dive and we find that online shopping is very much
used for buying clothes online (around 83% of respondents chose this option) followed by
electronic gadgets shopping (around 73% of respondents chose this option). Kitchen
groceries (around 66% of the respondents chose this option), fresh vegetables and fruits
(around 50% of the respondents chose this option), healthcare products (around 49% of the
respondents chose this option) and medical products (around 38% of the respondents chose
this option) are also major products to be purchased via online purchases.
179
5.2.6 Research Question Nine: What are the reasons you would leave an e-commerce
vendor?
While we are studying the various factors of e-commerce vendors and online
buyers, it is also important to draw attention to the factors which will de-motivate an online
buyer to remain loyal to a specific e-commerce vendor. On analysis the graph indicates
that primary reason for an online buyer to switch loyalty would be ‘Bad reputation of the
e-commerce vendors in terms of delivery quality’ (around 72% of the respondents says so).
This is important from various factors of research as this would enable researchers to
develop technology frameworks to solve this problem. The other factors which decide on
the loyalty of the online buyer is price factor, easy returnable process, post sales services
and variety to chose from.
Figure-76
Comparison of the reasons for an online buyer to leave e-commerce vendor
Source: Author
5.2.7 Research Question Ten and Eleven: Will you be excited for a quick delivery
and what products would you prefer for quick delivery?
If we analyze the response from the respondents we find that around 80% of the
online buyers are very interested for quick delivery, and there are around 20% online
buyers who do not have any choice on quick delivery and they are fine with the current
180
state of affairs. This certainly means that there is a demand in online buyers for quick
delivery and e-commerce vendors are certainly putting their best foot forward to become
market leaders. The graph below provides a very clear demarcation of the requirement of
quick delivery from current online buyers.
Figure-77
Ratio of online buyers for quick delivery
Source: Author
On analyzing the next question, we find products preferred by the buyers for quick
delivery. The highest preference is provided to ‘Medicine’ (around 84%) followed by
‘Fresh vegetables and fruits’ (around 77%) followed by ‘Healthcare products and
cosmetics’ (around 46%). This looks correct and correlated because medicines (because of
health concerns) and fresh fruits and vegetables (because of perishable in nature) are
needed on priority basis.
181
Figure-78
Preferences of products for quick delivery by online buyers
Source: Author
5.2.8 Research Question Twelve: Would you be willing to pay extra for quick
delivery?
A very important question for this research and the analysis clearly shows that 65%
of the respondents are willing to pay extra for quick delivery. The extra payment range
differs from 1% to 15% more than the regular prices. This is a very positive news for the
research as it means there is a demand for quick delivery and there are online buyers who
would not mind shelling extra money to get the quick delivery facility. Since there is a
demand and revenue involved hence the e-commerce vendors can develop a working
model around it.

Figure-79
Depiction of willingness of online buyer to spend extra for quick delivery
Source: Author
182
5.2.9 Research Question Thirteen: What facilities do you want to have during quick
delivery?
Response to this question actually provisions us to analyze the facility needs of
online buyers related to quick delivery. If we look closer, we find that to adhere to these
needs/ requirements of the online buyers there would be a need to develop technology
solutions and adopt them horizontally across e-commerce vendors. Major need is to have
safe and quality delivery (around 79% of respondents say so) and around 41% of the
respondents are fine if delivery is done by a physical human or an autonomous vehicle (can
be drone or a car). However, there is a need for clear communication to track the status of
the order as depicted by 62% of the respondents.
Figure-80
Analysis of facilities required by online buyers for quick delivery
Source: Author
5.3 Discussion of Research Results for E-commerce Vendors
In this section we will discuss the responses received from the e-commerce vendors.
These are the stakeholders who provide the online platform for enabling online purhcases.
However they are not restricted to online platform development but they own the entire
supply chain which need to be efficient and smooth to adhere to quick delivery.
183
5.3.1 Research Question One and Two: Year of Establishment and Registered Country
From the responses received by the e-commerce vendors, it is very evident that they
all are registered in India and have been operating from a long time. In-fact there are certain
e-commerce vendors who have been operating since 2007. Hence this is very safe to
assume that these e-commerce vendors do have a very rich experience in operating within
India.
5.3.2 Research Question Three and Four: Geographical area of operations and Average
annual revenue in USD million for last 5 financial years?
On analysis we find that operations are primarily happening in India and some of
the e-commerce vendors have their presence in Middle-East and couple of them also
operate out of Europe and Americas too. This means that most of e-commerce vendors
have international experience and on deeper analysis we also find that all the e-commerce
vendors (100% of them) have annual average revenue in past 5 years is more than $10
million, which certainly makes it clear that they have capability to invest into technology.
5.3.3 Research Question Five: Does your organization deal with end-to-end e-commerce
process, or do you have partners associated with it?
Analysis of this question reveals two important information:
a. Looking into the size of the country India, how many e-commerce vendors possess the
ability to run this mammoth size business (in terms of money and scale of operations)?
b. How many vendors completely believe in outsourcing the operations while what is the
ratio of e-commerce vendors who have opted for a hybrid model of operations?
184
The questions above are important to the researcher to prove his theory, because if there
is a majority of e-commerce vendors opting for option #a then the theory does not hold
true and there is no point of proving it. But if the majority of the e-commerce vendors opts
for #b then the theory is worth proving.
On analysis of the responses for this question, we come to know that around 92%
of the e-commerce vendors have partnered in one form or another to ensure smooth
operations while only 8% of the e-commerce vendors are owning end to end business of
their own.
5.3.4 Research Question Six and Seven: What stage of e-commerce are you involved in
and what stage of e-commerce have you partnered for?
From the responses, we analyze that there is only one e-commerce vendor (out of
thirteen online respondent vendors) who do not have any partners involved and they own
execution of end-to-end supply chain by itself, rest of the vendors have been developing
partners at different stages to have seamless last mile delivery. It is also interesting to note
that none of the e-commerce vendors have outsourced accounting & billing as well as
customer care and these two processes are kept in-house. On the other hand, with a closer
look it is evident that organization e-commerce strategy and branding process is mostly
kept in-house but there are some e-commerce vendors who use partners for branding &
strategy. It is also very clear that most of the e-commerce vendors are using hybrid
operating models (self-owned as well as outsourced to partners) for sourcing materials,
warehousing & logistics, and last mile delivery.
On further analysis of respondent’s data, it is quite clear that e-commerce vendors
are developing the local market using local partners. This analysis helps to strengthen the
research case for promoting co-ownership and co-sharing of resources like technology, real
estate, knowledge and data for efficient last mile delivery.
185
5.3.5 Research Question Eight: Identify the challenges as an organization you are
facing with?
Based on the responses from the e-commerce vendors we come to some safe
conclusions. One of the important conclusions is that every e-commerce vendor (100% of
the e-commerce vendors) is facing one common challenge to ‘optimize the operations cost’
followed by other prominent challenges (around 92% of e-commerce vendors) like
dynamic shift in ‘customer loyalty’ and ‘product price’. The next type of challenge faced
by e-commerce vendors are ‘optimized combination of routing and delivery’ and
‘managing customer expectations of delivery’ which contribute to around 85% between all
e-commerce vendors. If we take a closer look at the challenges posed to e-commerce
vendors, then we understand that e-commerce vendors need to adopt to the technological
advancements like Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Robotics & Autonomy.
Adoption of technology will assist the e-commerce vendors to reduce the operating cost,
optimize delivery routing and time, take informed decisions on various factors important
to e-commerce business. At the same time, e-commerce vendors should start promoting
internally to co-share and co-own resources and partners to bring optimization in cost and
efficiency in operations keeping abreast local geographical sensitivity.
These assertions are important as they bring in high level of confidence to the
theory proposed by the researcher and paves way for acceptance of the framework in this
research document.
5.3.6 Research Question Nine: Quarterly investment related to latest technology
stacks for AI-ML, robots, digital web apps, reporting & dashboarding etc?
186
As per data analysis, we find that around 46% of the e-commerce vendor spend
more than $100,000 per quarter for adopting to latest technology related to AI-ML,
robotics, digital web apps and dashboards. Following, there are around 15% of e-commerce
vendors who have quarterly spent between $75,000 and $100,000 and there are around
23% of the e-commerce vendors whose quarterly spent is between $50,000 and $75,000.
These are very good numbers which certainly establishes that there is great opportunity
among the e-commerce vendors to adopt to technology innovations and enhancements to
support enhancing operational efficiency and reducing cost of operations. These numbers
are strong supporter of the research theory where-in it is evident that if there is a required
technology or operational framework which can bring efficiency and cost reduction in e-
commerce for last mile delivery process then these e-commerce vendors would certainly
adopt it.
5.3.7 Research Question Ten: Technology stacks already present in the organization?
If we analyze the responses provided, we find that around 92% of e-commerce
vendors are spending most on ‘Intelligent Analytics and Dashboard Reporting for real time
monitoring’. This indicates that the 92% e-commerce vendors are trying to first resolve
challenges for getting real time information to take informed decisions. At the same time,
if we take a closer look at the other responses, we also see that 85% of e-commerce vendors
are spending on the technology stack to optimize logistics and warehouse operations. One
of the other areas where-in 77% of the e-commerce vendors spend on bringing efficiency
within delivery operations and routing optimizations.
5.3.8 Research Question Eleven and Twelve: Technology stacks e-commerce
organization planning to deploy in period of next 6 months to 18 months?
187
Analysis to the responses for this part of question produces different results and we
observe that around 92% of e-commerce vendors intend within 6 months to spent on
technology stack for delivery and routing optimizations. Similarly, we also find that 87%
of e-commerce vendors are planning to invest in the period of 6 months to 18 months for
AI & ML technology stacks for logistics and warehousing operational efficiencies. We also
observe that there is an increase in the spent from 77% to 100% in the period range of 6
months to 18 months related to robotics and autonomous vehicles for last mile delivery.
This data is a very good data as it provides enough information of the interest of e-
commerce vendors to spend in various technologies in the time period of 6 months to 18
months as it is a supportive data for this research and indicates that the research theory is
worth proving.
5.3.9 Research Question Thirteen: Reason for not investing in technology stack?
The response data is unanimous and all 100% of e-commerce vendors are already
geared to invest in the technology stack for supporting one or more requirements of quick
commerce last mile delivery.
5.3.10 Research Question Fourteen: What is your logistics model, do you have your
own logistics and warehouse team?

On carefully analyzing the response we find that there around 39% of the e-
commerce vendor have their own logistics and warehouse team while 46% of the e-
commerce vendors have a hybrid business model where-in the logistics team is owned by
e-commerce vendors as well as partners, while on the other hand around 15% of the e-
commerce vendors have outsourced it to third party partners.
188
5.3.11 Research Question Fifteen: What is your expense in having your own logistics
warehouse set up?
From the responses we observe that 70% of the e-commerce vendors spend more
than $20,000 per quarter, while 16% of the e-commerce vendors spend between $10,000
to $20,000 per quarter. It is also witnessed that around 16% of the e-commerce vendors do
not have their own logistics setup but have outsourced the same to third party logistics
team. Hence from these data results it is clearly evident that warehouse and logistics team
has enough revenue to spent on technology stacks for bringing in efficiency in the logistics
and supply chain process of e-commerce. This also corroborates with the analysis in
question 5.3.8 where-in 87% of the e-commerce vendors are intending to spend on
operational efficiency of warehouse and logistics.
5.3.12 Research Question Sixteen: What is your expense in having logistics warehouse
set up operated by third party logistics partner?
From the response of question 5.3.11 and 5.3.12 we can clearly make out that
whether an e-commerce vendor operates the business by self or commissions the business
to its partners, in both cases the operating expenses are high, and as per response data
around 54% of e-commerce vendors spend more than $20,000 per quarter while around
8% spend between $10,000 to $20,000 per quarter. Thus it is clear that a good amount of
focus is on operating efficiency at warehouse and logistics process of supply chain.
5.3.13 Research Question Seventeen: What is your product delivery model?
Based on the responses, it is clear that around 54% e-commerce vendors are using
hybrid model where they are directly involved in last mile delivery and have also partnered
with the last mile delivery partners. At the same time there are 23% e-commerce vendors
189
who manage the last mile delivery themselves and on the other hand 23% of the e-
commerce vendors have outsourced their last mile delivery to the last mile delivery
partners. Hence it is evident that most of the e-commerce vendors (around 77%) are
developing local partners for doing last mile delivery. This is a very good indication that
e-commerce vendors are quite aware of the potential capabilities and expertise local
partners can bring in the supply chain process. This result is also a great promoter of the
fact that co-ownership and co-sharing of infrastructure resources and technology stack is
going to benefit the entire stakeholders in the supply chain process.
5.3.14 Research Question Eighteen: What is your expense in product delivery using
From the responses we find out that 77% of e-commerce vendors spend more than
$20,000 per quarter irrespective of the fact if they are doing last mile delivery themselves
or using partners or both. Around 8% of the e-commerce vendors are spending between
$5000 to $10,000 per quarter and around 15% e-commerce vendors say they have
outsourced. The response data clearly depicts that regarding last mile delivery the e-
commerce vendors spend is high and they certainly have an appetite to adapt to technology
innovations/ enhancements as well as develop local delivery partners for their experience
of the local place.
5.3.15 Research Question Nineteen: What is your expense in product delivery using
delivery partner?
The responses to this question is complementary to the responses in previous
question 5.3.14 we can conclude from the responses, that, around 70% of the e-commerce
vendors spend more than $20,000 per quarter while using last mile delivery partners.
190
5.3.16 Research Question Twenty: Are you aware of the concept of co-owned or co-
shared logistics and delivery model in e-commerce supply chain?
The assessment of the response indicates that around 92% of the e-commerce
vendors are not aware of how the co-ownership and co-shared operating model works and
they are neither interested to go on this road, while 8% of the e-commerce vendors are of
this model in question, but they are not aware of how to start the same. This provides ample
opportunity for research and analysis as how these 92% of the e-commerce vendors can be
boarded on the logic of adapting to shared co-owning or co-sharing of infrastructure
resources and technology stack adoption.
5.3.17 Research Question Twenty-one: If your answer to above question is (c) then
From the responses received by respondents we find that 85% of e-commerce
vendors believe that they have a time-tested model and they have no strategy to change the
already working model while 15% of the e-commerce vendors believe that it does make
sense to use the model but they are not sure of the security of the brand during co-sharing
and co-owning of the logistics and last mile delivery process.
5.3.18 Research Question Twenty-two: If you are planning to go with co-sourcing/ co-
From the responses given all e-commerce vendors have indicated that they do not
have any details as of now.
5.4 Discussion of Research Results for Logistics & Warehouse Partners
191
In this section we will discuss the responses received from the logistics and
warehouse partners. These are the stakeholders who ensure seamless operations of logistics
and warehouse process within e-commerce supply chain. There are many challenges in this
process of supply chain which can disrupt the entire process and bring heavy losses or
higher operating cost to the business.
From the responses received by the logistics and warehouse partners, it is very
evident that they all are registered in India and have been operating from a long time. In-
fact there are certain logistics and warehouse partners who have been operating since 1853.
Hence this is very safe to assume that these logistics and warehouse partners do have a
very rich experience in operating within India.
5.4.2 Research Question Three: Which geographical region(s) does your logistics and
warehouse organization operate in?
The responses received from the e-commerce vendors and their logistics and
warehouse partners clearly highlight that the primary geographical location of operations
is spread majorly across Asia and then followed by Europe, Middle-East and America.
Hence, it would be a safe assumption that all the responses provided in the questionnaire
will provide a greater insight of India market as 100% of the respondents operate in India.
These responses will provide insights as how the logistics and warehouse teams operate at
the fullest capacity within Indian subcontinent.
5.4.3 Research Question Four: What is your average annual revenue per year for the
last 5 financial years?
192
From the response to this question, we find that 87% of the logistics and warehouse
team were having a revenue of more than $10 million while 13% of the team or partners
had a revenue between $1 million and $5 million. Hence it is safe to assume that most of
logistics and warehouse teams and partners are financially stable to support adoption of
technology as well as to promote the model of co-ownership and/ or co-sharing of logistics
and warehouse premises and processes.
5.4.4 Research Question Five: Does your organization deal with end-to-end logistics
process of supply chain, or do you have sub-partners with you?
From the response we find that around 73% of the logistics teams take care of end-
to-end logistics and warehouse process while 20% of the logistics team have also involved
sub-partners to take care of the load of logistics and warehouses in rural areas. It should
also be noted that around 7% of the logistics team have established sub-partners for support
during the main peak season like festivals, new year’s etc.
The response gives enough confidence that the warehouse and logistics partners
can manage supply chain from warehouse & logistics to last mile delivery perspective. For
efficiency in logistics and delivery, there are multiple local partner chain which ensures
that the delivery is seamless and with the right delivery parameters of time and quality.
5.4.5 Research Question Six: What warehouse and logistics processes is your
organization involved with?
On deeper analysis of the responses to this question, we derive that warehouse and
logistics team manages end to end logistics process within their warehouse, but when it
comes to the partner warehouse, their support is around 7% and they expect the warehouse
partners to resolve their challenges by themselves. It is also evident that all warehouse &
193
logistics partners would agree to manage transportation system for themselves as well as
transportation partners to ensure timely delivery. It is also observed that 80% of the
logistics partners are involved in Export & Import process, and around 93% are involved
directly or indirectly in the last mile delivery process.
5.4.6 Research Question Seven: For what part of logistics process have you partnered?
Based on the response, we find that around 53% of logistics teams do not have
partners involved and they are running their business of their own. Around 47% of the
logistics team have partnered for last mile delivery which means they have extended their
coverage, on the other hand around 27% logistics team are also involved in managing the
logistics and warehouses at sub-partner’s level.
5.4.7 Research Question Eight: Do you have multiple e-commerce vendors partnered
for warehousing and logistics process?
Through the response from the logistics team, we find that 93% of the logistics
team have multiple e-commerce vendors for whom they act as third-party logistics &
warehouse partners while there are 7% logistics team who are dedicated to one single e-
commerce vendor.
5.4.8 Research Question Nine: Identify challenges you face as a logistics and warehouse
partner?
As per the response from the various logistics and warehousing team we find that
most of the partners and team apx 93% face challenges in ‘Adhering to quality delivery’
and ‘Setting up best combination of routing and delivery’, and it clearly means that
technology adoption can play a greater role to solve this problem. If we take a look at the
194
second set of problematic situation, we find that managing ‘dynamic warehousing for
multiple e-commerce vendors’ is a big challenge, followed by ‘technology adoption for
real time monitoring’ and ‘high volume management during festive seasons’. All these
challenges clearly depict that with technology adoption these problems can be removed,
and it serves the purpose of the research.
5.4.9 Research Question Ten: Are you using robots and cobots in your warehousing and
logistics process?
The responses from the respondents clearly indicate that one third of the
respondents have intention to induct robots/ cobots in their system in next 12 months.
Similarly, around next one-third of the respondents have already been using cobots/ robots
in their process past 12 months and there is another one-third who either have no intent or
are still struggling at ROI level for inducing robots/ cobots in their process.
5.4.10 Research Question Eleven: What is your quarterly investment related to latest
technology stacks for AI-ML, robots, digital web-apps, reporting & dashboarding etc?
From the responses, it is evident that 27% of the logistics team have been investing
heavily to a tune of more than $100,000 per quarter equally followed by 27% of logistics
team having spent between $75,000 and $100,000 and so on. It is interesting to note that
around 7% of the logistics team have declared that they have not spent any budget on above
mentioned technology stacks. So, it is safe to say that the investment capabilities to adopt
technology enhancements is quite high.
5.4.11 Research Question Twelve: Which of the following stack is already in place
within your organization?
195
Responses from the warehouse & logistics partners reveal that enough has been
done for getting the real-time updates within warehouse & logistics process. This is evident
as 80% of the responses indicate the same and is a natural choice because the first thing in
warehouse and logistics would be to have an updated status of the inventory and the process
to take informed decisions. It is also very evident that around 73% of warehouse & logistics
partners are spending on using AI ML for optimized delivery routings and intelligent
analytics. This will assist them to optimize the cost of operations and take informed
decision to further optimize scale of economies.
5.4.12 Research Question Thirteen and Fourteen: Which of the following stack is your
organization planning to deploy in the next 6 months to 18 months?
On analysis of the response it comes out clearly that warehouse and logistics
partners are more likely to invest on routing optimizations and delivery efficiency by using
AI-ML algorithms. This trend will increase from 6 months and within 18 months a good
amount will be covered. On closer look we also find that Robotics, autonomous vehicles
will gain a good traction of investment starting from 53% in next 6 months to 73% in next
18 months. This will mean that there would be lots of research going on in this area. Real
time notifications will remain in constant demand from 6 months to 18 months range. This
makes a clear assumption that technology will be heavily relied for better efficiency and
optimizations thus supporting this research.
5.4.13 Research Question Fifteen: What is the reason for not investing in technology
stacks?
196
operations for logistics and warehouse process finally leading to last mile delivery. On the
other hand there are 7% of the logistics partner who claim that they do not have adequate
skills to identify the right technology stack which would be helpful for them.
5.4.14 Research Question Sixteen: What is your logistics model, do you have partners
for logistics?
From the responses, we find that around 73% of the logistics and warehouse team
do not have extended arm using third party logistics team while on the other hand around
27% of the logistics and warehouse partners have sub-contracted for extended support.
5.4.15 Research Question Seventeen and Eighteen: What is your expense in having your
own logistics warehouse setup vs using third party logistics partners?
On comparing the responses we observe that 67% of the logistics team manage the
process by themselves and rest 33% of the logistics team have partnered with third party
partners for support in logistics process. Whether it is warehouse and logistics setup by the
self team or using the partners the majority of the warehouse team has expenses more than
$20,000 per quarter. There are fewer logistics and warehouse team who spend less than
$20,000 per quarter.
5.4.16 Research Question Nineteen: What is your organization product delivery model?
Based on the responses, it is clear that around 87% logistics team are directly
involved in logistics and warehousing process. At the same time there are 13% logistics
team who have sub-contracted their logistics and warehouse process to third party.
197
5.4.17 Research Question Twenty and Twenty-one: What is your expense in product
delivery by using your own employee and team vs using a delivery partner?
On comparing the responses we observe that 67% of the logistics team manage
delivery process by themselves and rest 33% of the logistics team have partnered with third
party delivery partners for support in last mile delivery process. Whether it is delivery
process setup by the self team or using the partners the majority of the warehouse team has
expenses more than $20,000 per quarter. There are fewer logistics and warehouse team
who spend less than $20,000 per quarter.
5.4.18 Research Question Twenty-two: Are you interested in co-ownership or co-shared
logistics and delivery model in e-commerce supply chain for better business and
revenue model?
The assessment of the response indicates that around 60% of the logistics team are
interested while 40% are not willing to change their model as they are dedicated logistics
5.4.19 Research Question Twenty-three: If your answer to above question is (c) then
From the responses received by respondents we find that 40% of logistics partners
198
are 27% of the logistics partners who are already co-sharing.
5.4.20 Research Question Twenty-four: If you are planning to go with co-sourcing/
From the responses given 87% of logistics partners have indicated that they do not
have any details as of now. On the other hand there are 7% of logistics partners who are
investing around $20,000 per quarter and equal 7% of logistics partners are investing
between $1000 to $5000 per quarter on co-sharing and co-owning.
5.5 Discussion of Research Results for Delivery Partners

In this section we will discuss the responses received from the last mile delivery
partners. These are the stakeholders who ensure seamless operations of last mile delivery
process within e-commerce supply chain. There are many challenges in this process of
supply chain which can create dissatisfied customers, increase in cost of operations and
huge losses in terms of motor and insurances.
From the responses, we come to know that the operating experience is huge as
couple of organizations are operating in Indian environment and economy since 1854, and
the inceptions has been increasing year on year witnessing the addition of delivery partners
playing in Indian markets for its share of business in e-commerce and quick delivery for
last mile.
199
The responses received from the e-commerce vendors, logistics partners and their
delivery partners, clearly highlight that the primary geographical location of operations is
spread majorly across Asia and then followed by Europe, Middle-East and America.
Hence, it would be a safe assumption that all the responses provided in the questionnaire
will provide a greater insight of India market as 100% of the respondents operate in India.
These responses will provide insights as how the logistics and warehouse teams operate at
the fullest capacity within Indian subcontinent.
financial years?
From the response of this question we find that 93% of the delivery partners were
having a revenue of more than $10 million while 7% of the team or partners had a revenue
between $1 million and $5 million. Hence it is safe to assume that most of last mile delivery
teams and partners are financially stable to support adoption of technology as well as
promote the model of co-ownership and/ or co-sharing of logistics and warehouse premises
and processes.
5.5.4 Research Question Five: Does your organization deal with end-to-end delivery
process of supply chain, or do you have sub-partners associated with you?
From the response we find that around 73% of the delivery teams take care of end
to end logistics and warehouse process while 27% of the delivery team have also involved
sub-partners to take care of the load of last mile delivery at rural areas
5.5.5 Research Question Six: What are the different modes of delivery your
organization deal in?
200
It is very clear from the response that 100% of the last mile delivery team are using
delivery boys using motor-vehicles to ensure physical delivery. There is no mention of any
un-manned vehicle (aerial or road) for last mile delivery
5.5.6 Research Question Seven: Do you have multiple e-commerce vendors/ logistics
team partnered for warehousing and logistics?
Through the response from the delivery team, we find that 87% of the delivery team
have multiple e-commerce vendors for whom they act as last mile delivery partners while
there are 13% logistics team who are dedicated to one single e-commerce vendor or
logistics team.
5.5.7 Research Question Eight: Identify from below options regarding the challenges
you have been facing with?
As per the response from the various delivery teams we find that 100% of the
partners and team face challenges in ‘Timely delivery during bad weather’ and it clearly
means that technology adoption can play a greater role to solve this problem. If we take a
look at the next sets of problematic situation, we find that managing ‘location and
neighborhood search’ and ‘optimizing delivery route and mapping delivery boys’ is a big
challenge, followed by ‘real time monitoring’. All these challenges clearly depict that with
technology adoption these problems can be removed and it serves the purpose of the
research.
5.5.8 Research Question Nine: What is your quarterly investment related to latest
technology stacks for AI-ML, robots, digital web apps, reporting & dashboarding etc?
201
From the responses, it is evident that 27% of the delivery team have been investing
heavily to a tune of more than $100,000 per quarter equally followed by 13% of delivery
team having spent between $75,000 and $100,000 and so on. It is interesting to note that
40% of the delivery team spend between $50,000 to $75,000 per quarter and there are no
last mile delivery partners who have not spent any budget on above mentioned technology
stacks.
5.5.9 Research Question Ten: Which of the following technology stack is already in
place within your organization?
Responses from the Last Mile delivery partners reveal that enough has been done
for getting the real-time updates within delivery process. This is evident as 100% of the
responses indicate the same and is a natural choice because the first thing in the delivery
process would be to have an updated status of the delivery and the delivery vehicles to take
informed decisions. It is also very evident that around 80% of delivery partners are
spending money on using AI ML for optimized delivery routings and integrated digital
applications for pickup – delivery points and schedules. This will assist them to optimize
the cost of operations and take informed decisions to further optimize scale of economies.
5.5.10 Research Question Eleven and Twelve: Which of the following stack is your
organization planning to deploy in the next 6 months to 18 months?
On analysis of the responses by delivery partners, it is evident that they intend to
develop and deploy solutions to assist the delivery boys to plan schedule for pickup and
drops for the day. This requirement remains the top priority for 100% of delivery partners
to be implemented by 18 months. We also understand that priority to optimize delivery
schedule is also a recommended need for delivery partners and hence around 67% of the
delivery partners are spending money to employ AI-ML routines for achieving this target.
202
We also find out that autonomous delivery will gain traction from 27% in 6 months to 53%
in 18 months and delivery partners will spend on procuring and/ or developing such
technologies within their delivery process.
5.5.11 Research Question Thirteen: What is the reason for not investing in technology
stacks?
As we can see from the responses captured, all the delivery partners claim that they
are already investing in adopting the technology to ensure seamless and efficient operations
for the last mile delivery process. On the other hand, 7% of the delivery partners claim that
they do not have funds to invest in technology adoption.
5.5.12 Research Question Fourteen: What are your expenses in product delivery by
self?
From the responses we observe that 100% of the delivery team spend more than
$20,000 per quarter
5.5.13 Research Question Fifteen: If you have one, then what is your expense in
managing the logistics by a 3rd party delivery partner?
As we can conclude from the responses, around 13% of the delivery team spend
more than $20,000 per quarter and equally 13% spend between $10,000 to $20,000 per
quarter while there are 67% of the logistics team who are owning the end to end process
by themselves and have not sub-contracted to the partners.
203
5.5.14 Research Question Sixteen: Are you interested in co-ownership or co-shared
logistics and delivery model in e-commerce supply chain for better business & revenue
model?
The assessment of the response indicates that around 60% of the delivery team are
interested while 40% are not willing to change their model as they are dedicated delivery
5.5.15 Research Question Seventeen: If your answer to above question is (c) then
From the responses received by respondents we find that 47% of delivery partners
believe that they have a time-tested model and they have no strategy to change the already
of the logistics and last mile delivery process. At the same time, an interesting fact is that
there are 13% of the delivery partners who claim that they have done their studies but they
do not find a cost benefit out of this model.
5.5.16 Research Question Eighteen: If you are planning to go with co-sourcing/ co-
From the responses given 73% of delivery partners have indicated that they do not
have any details as of now. On the other hand there are 7% of delivery partners who are
expecting benefits between 21% - 30% per quarter and 20% of delivery partners believe
that they could make a saving of 11% - 20% per quarter on co-sharing and co-owning.
204
CHAPTER VI:
SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Summary
The current study is focused on four important stakeholders (i) The online buyers
(ii) the e-commerce vendors providing platform for online purchsaes (iii) the warehouse
and logistics company which ensures seamless supply chain and finally (iv) the last mile
delivery partners who ensures the delivery is done in agreed SLA timeline within agreed
quality delivery parameters. The current research was conducted with majorly three
objectives:
a. To identify if there is a demand for quick delivery and whether the online buyers are
ready to spend more than regular price for quick delivery.
b. To identify the challenging areas, faced by e-commerce vendors, warehouse &
logistics partners and last mile delivery partners, which can be solved and supported
by adopting to advancements in technology like AI-ML, robotics, digital applications,
and, autononmy.
c. To identify the business process which can be shared to support co-sharing and co-
owning of the resources for bringing in efficiency in operating cost.
The data was collected by means of (i) responses to questionnaires (ii) interviews
conducted with some partners in supply chain (iii) data availablility from the respective
corporate websites. The data collected from the responses of questionnaires was analyzed
for correlation to the theory proposed and to ascertain if the theory holds true based on the
results of the analysis. It was very satisfying to see that there is a good demand for quick
commerce in specific segments like healthcare, medicines, meat products, fresh fruits and
vegetables. Hence, researcher summarises that there is a great scope in this area to develop
a right framework which can be employed by different geographies.
205
6.2 Implications
Researcher author believes that collaboraton in between e-commerce vendors can
lead to optimization of supply chain and distribution channels required for quick commerce
by sharing resources and technology. This thought has led to derivation of a concept
‘Collaborative Commerce’ and now this is an area of research as it offers various topics
for discussions. Kim S. et. al. (2005) talks in his research paper about how quick commerce
can be regarded as a next evolutionary step and beyond electronic commerce (e-
commerce). Some of these topics could be:
• How to manage brand security while sharing infrastructure, manpower and technology
resources with other e-commerce vendors?
• How can e-commerce vendors share information regarding delivery routing, inventory
& product specifictions etc.?
• How can last mile delivery partner be channeled to make multi-vendor deliveries in
minimum delivery cycles?
• What is the cost benefit in collaborating with other e-commerce vendors rather than
doing all by themselves?
• What would be the impact on the market share which currently an e-commerce vendor
hold?
• How would languages, culture, geographical processes, time-zones etc challenges
would be resolved?
As per Marshall Hargrave (2023) ‘Collaborative Commerce’ is a new focus for
organizations and it would be a hybrid model where-in businesses will work very closely
with competitors and suppliers and they would exchange information for products, market
analysis, technology breakthroughs etc. for becoming profitable and highly competitive.
This research initiated with a study to support following theories:
206
• There is a demand of quick commerce specially for medicines and persihable items
like meat products, fresh vegetables.
• The ecommerce vendors, warehouse & logistics partners and last mile delivery
partners can co-share and co-own the resources to optimize the cost of operaions.
As per Chernukhina et. al. (2021), dark stores can be developed in the rural areas
which will be a very competitive approach for delivery of goods to the customers.
• The different stakeholders should adopt to technology advancements for better
delivery operations and manging cost efficiency.
As per Blaire McClure (2023) in her post to BigCommerce website, the goal of the
collaboration between different vendors is to help both parties with a creative, transparent
and relational collaboration and research author believes it will yield following benefits:
• Cost effectiveness: Budget friendly partnership invoking leveraging of existing
customers connection.
• High return on investment: It has been analyzed that low-maturity partnerships are
yielding 18% of company revenue while highly matured partnerships programs
contribute to 28% of company revenue.
• Improved brand awareness: Partners while collaborating develops trustworthy

relationships hence promoting brand advocacy.
• Greater customer retention: Because of multiple benefits like reduced cost, fast
delivery, increase in product catalogue etc. would motivate customers and there will
be higher retention of customers.
• Bigger market share: Collaboration would provide first-mover advantage speeding
up the market share.
This research has its implications on Indian society and geography as follows:
207
a. Reduction in traffic explosion: If the framework is established and the e-commerce
vendors – warehouse & logistics partners – last mile delivery partners all work
together then there will be operational efficiency and it will decrease the load over
traffic conditions.
b. Reduction in traffic accidents: Looking in the reports of Indian continent, we find
that the road accidents have increased with the increasing demand of quick
commerce. With the framework in place and traffic conditions more controlled,
there certainly would be a reduction in traffic accidents saving many lives.
c. Reduction in motor and life claims: With the reduction in accidents, there would be
a reduction in insurance claims of motor accidents and human lives.
d. Change of policies and governing laws: The research would not directly affect
Indian continent law, but certainly the law makers can provision law which would
impact positively the society on traffic conditions, insurance procedures etc.
Collaborative Framework supporting theory of researcher for co-sharing of
resources and technology.
As per Eldon Li (2004), collaborative commerce was first coined in 1999 by

Gartner group as the future business model and a survey of 300 business executives by
Deloitte researchers forecasted to achieve 70% rise in profitability. However, this research
was done only on Information Exchange regarding collaborative engineering, collaborative
decision making, collaborative financial data and human resource data using ERP products
like SAP. Having cited so, researcher believes the concept to hold true even in business
models as well as technology models and Chen Q. et. al. (2010) have tried to develop a
framework for awareness of collaborative e-commerce in his research paper.
208
Researcher author proposes a collaboration framework model between stakeholders
in pictorial form is as below:
Figure-81
Proposed Collaboration Framework Model
Source: Author’s Work of image
The framework proposed by researcher has three important pillars:
a) Business Process: This pillar consists of all the processes which are needed by all
e-commerce stakeholders starting from e-commerce vendors, warehouse &
logistics partners, transportation partners and last mile delivery partners. These
stakeholders would need business operations stitched in a way where the
information and resources could be shared by one another based on the unification
of the business processes being adhered by the stakeholders. So for example, there
could be a rise in Third Party Logistics (3PL) rather than having owned logistics
209
program which will enable multiple e-commerce brands to store their products very
near to consumer thereby supporting quick commerce.
• Insourcing: Currently, e-commerce vendors insource products from
multiple sources, but this concept does not relate to co-sourcing. In co-
sourcing, the researcher aims for e-commerce vendor(s) to furnish the
consumer product demand as market opportunity to local e-commerce vendors
(or nearest e-commerce vendors) for fulfilment. In this way the consumer/
online buyer would not need to place his orders separately via different digital
apps.
To make this insourcing collaboration process a success it is important to have
an integration of data and business process where-in the products from different
e-commerce platforms can be pulled depending on the location proximity and
get delivered within SLA time along with agreed quality. There would be
multiple challenges during the insourcing stage like ‘Order complexity’,
‘volume fluctuations’, ‘order fulfilment speed’ and they need to be addressed
for integrated order management system, automated order processing system,
automated bill reconciliation system and should protect brand value.

To make collaborative insourcing a successful process, KPI based measurable
parameters would be needed in between e-commerce vendors. Some of the KPI
parameters for collaborative in-sourcing which research author proposes are as
below:
Table-17
Insourcing process KPI list
KPI Name KPI Description Measurable Parameters
Order Measures the average time o Low order acceptance time once
Processing it takes for an order to be order is shifted from one e-commerce
Time vendor to another.
210
processed from time of o Low order processing time by final e-
order to final delivery. commerce vendor resulting in happy
customers.
o Order fulfillment rate for shifted
orders. Higher the fulfilment rate
better the collaboration.
Product Data Measures the number of o Low data failure rate means that the
Interchange products data served based data interchange collaboration is
on the request given for highly successful. Data failure rate
shift of consumer order could be because of ‘wrong product
from one e-commerce information’, ‘defective product
vendor to another information’, ‘no-product service
information’
Source: Author
• Warehousing: This is a very interesting chapter for collaboration. As of the
norm, it is witnessed that some major e-commerce players increase their brand
value, investing a lot of money to open fulfillment centers, warehouses and dark
stores. Now given that India is a large country, these e-commerce vendors are
unable to reach the rural and remote locations of Indian states. Hence, the researcher
intends to initiate a thought process of promoting culture of Third Party Logistics
(3PL). It should be noted that 3PL is not a new concept at all, but this is being used
a lot by many manufacturing OEM especially the automotive OEMs. This is a real
use case where-in the fulfillment centers, dark stores, warehouses etc. can be co-
shared by the different e-commerce vendors which will directly impact in reduced
investment cost and being near to the consumers with an additional benefit of
playing a very meaningful role in creating more local jobs.
The collaborative 3PL will have its own set of inefficiencies like ‘Inaccuracy in
inventory records’, ‘Un-optimized space utilization’, ‘Lack of supply chain
visibility’.
However, the warehouse collaboration would need specific measurable KPIs as
below:
211
Table-18
Warehouse collaboration KPI list
Shrinkage Measures the amount of o Low shrinkage value means the
Ratio inventory lost or reduced products are well managed and
due to theft, damage, protected.
spoilage or miscounting.
Receiving Measures how quickly and o High receiving efficiency means that
efficiency efficiently warehouse warehouse has smooth and error-free
receives and inspects the receiving process.
incoming goods from
suppliers.
Order Lead Measures the time required o A low order lead time means better
time to fulfill each order, and efficient warehouse operations.
starting from order
placement till it is ready to
be delivered.
Fulfilment Measures % of orders o High fulfillment accuracy rate means
accuracy rate fulfilled by warehouse better warehouse operations
correctly without any management.
defects or errors.
On-time Measures the % of orders o High on-time shipping rate means
shipping rate shipped before or on time better warehouse operations
from warehouse. management.
Source: Author
• Transport Management: This is a space where collaboration between the e-
commerce vendors needs high level of maturity. This stage focuses on the
movement of goods from producer space to large warehouses, fulfilment
centers across the geography, dark stores in the remote or rural areas. This stage
will have direct impact on cost, time and quality of delivery of products and
the collaboration can be successful if multi-nodal transport companies of the
country join hands to solve multiple business challenges like ‘Space utilization
of transport fleets’, ‘Controlled temperature based multi-compartment
vehicles’, ‘Right guidance of the sequence of locations vis-à-vis goods
delivery’ etc. The most important factor here would be perishable items which
will be transported using temperature-controlled fleets as these perishable
items would have a shelf life for delivery.
212
To ensure that the collaborative transportation management is working
efficiently between multiple e-commerce vendors, certain KPIs are
recommended as below:
Table-19
Collaborative Transport KPI list
Number of Measures how many loads o High number of shipments means
shipments shipped against a time high demand of transportation.
period such as week/ o Correct sequence of load delivery
months/ quarters/ years etc. based on the location of delivery
Transport cost Measures the total cost of o Low transportation cost means
transporting goods process is efficient and cost effective.
including fuel, labour,
maintenance, insurance etc.
Fuel efficiency Measures quantity of fuel o High fuel efficiency means process is
consumed per km by the environment friendly and reduces
transportation vehicles. carbon footprint.
Accident Rate Measures the work-related o Lower the accident rates means
injuries during transportation process is safe and
transportation. reliable.
Source: Author
• Vendors and SOB Management: During collaboration with various suppliers, it
is important to adhere to Share of Business (SOB)%, else the e-commerce
vendors will land into situation where most of the business would go to specific
vendors/ partners and this will certainly bring dissatisfaction among other
partners leading to failure of collaboration.
This collaboration item has limited KPI:

Table-20
Vendor SOB KPI list
Share of Measures how the SOB o Low SOB% to some partners even
Business was adhered by the e- though with established capacity
(SOB)% commerce vendors and means lower collaboration trust.
adherence partners
Source: Author
• Last Mile Delivery: This is the final business process but the most complex one
and is dependent on multiple factors like traffic conditions, weather conditions,
213
customer preferences, delivery routes, delivery confirmations etc. This stage
directly affects the customer loyalty, satisfaction and behavior hence the
collaboration at this stage should be with maximum benefits. There would be
many challenges faced at this stage like ‘Real time tracking of pending deliveries
along with geography location’, ‘Real time delivery routing to maximize
delivery output with minimum route deviations’, ‘Dynamic customer
expectations’, ‘Perishable items’, ‘Customer availability leading to multiple
turns’ etc.
To measure efficiency of collaboration in last mile delivery, following KPIs are
recommended by the researcher:
Table-21
Last mile delivery collaboration KPI list
On-time Measures the number of o High on-time delivery rate would
delivery rate order (in %) delivered translate to efficient delivery process
within the agreed timelines. and high customer satisfaction.
Order accuracy Measures % of orders o High order accuracy rate means
rate without errors, defects, efficient delivery process and high
damaged goods etc. customer satisfaction.
Customer Measures the degree of o High customer satisfaction rate means
satisfaction satisfaction customers have delivery process is well managed and
rate with the delivery process. meeting customer expectations.
Delivery cost Measures the cost of every o A low delivery cost per order means
per order delivery attempted/ made the delivery process is efficient and
to the customer. reduces the waste and overhead.
Source: Author
b) Technology: Technology adoption requires a huge amount of time and investment
and so this is the first-class candidate for sharing between stakeholders. In fact,
there could be some technologies which cannot be invested by some stakeholders
because of the sheer volume of research required and the facility to induct that
research would be a lot difficult by small players of their own. Here is the need,
when the different stakeholders can join hands and contribute to the research and
214
technological development as well as adoption. This could certainly mean that the
technology can be shared between the business houses and with the abstracted
information exchange the market could be more explored rather than leaving it to
happen by chance.
• Centralized Catalogue with Comparison: E-commerce vendors can integrate
data interchange among themselves to provide centralized catalogue based on
the geographical location and the consumer need. This will prove to be a boon
for the consumers as they would not need to switch between various e-
commerce vendor apps for getting more relevant prices and delivery options as
per his location.
• Dynamic Pricing: Current scenarios demand every e-commerce vendor to have

their own algorithms for product dynamic pricing, which creates an unfair
competition for the small e-commerce vendors and also for the consumer as
they would have a higher wait period to receive the product. The dynamic
pricing algorithm should be shared, and data interchange should be done to
have communized dynamic pricing which would provide benefit for business
and for consumers.

• Real Time Data Analysis: Technology enabling real time data analysis for
informed decision should be shared as this will involve the infrastructure and
resources. Not all e-commerce vendors would be in a position to invest for
having an extensive recommendation engine with intelligent analytics, and
hence data as well as application collaboration would help everyone here.
• Autonomous Vehicles: Some big e-commerce vendors players have a huge
capacity of investment for research and development regarding autonomous
vehicles including robots, cobots, drones, autonomous driving cars etc.
215
However, the same is not true for other ecommerce vendors who are local and
do not have great investment amount as IT spent. This is a very prime candidate
scenario where the autonomous vehicle technology can be shared with other e-
commerce vendors and their partners with a revenue model associated with it
to cover the investment cost. This certainly would benefit all the e-commerce
vendors and their supply chain partners till last mile delivery partners.
• Delivery Routing Algorithm: On analysis of the responses from delivery
partners, logistics partners and last mile delivery partners, we evidently find
that the right mix of delivery routing with delivery boys is a challenge everyone
is facing. There are algorithms which are continuously getting evolved based
on the ever-ending demand of nature of business to satisfy customer needs in
terms of speed and quality of delivery. The delivery routing algorithm can be
shared with multiple e-commerce vendors and their stakeholders on a revenue
model which will cover the cost of research and development along with
service operations cost.
• Capacity, Geolocation and SOB management: Once the collaboration

partnership and framework is being developed it is also important for the e-
commerce vendors and their next line of stakeholder businesses to efficiently
manage the Share of Business within the geography location. This will create
additional capacity to serve the online buyers.
c) Governance model: In this era of interwoven business processes, abstracted
information exchange and seamlessly weaved stakeholder’s operations there
certainly is a need to have an effective governance model. This model would be
needed to ensure sanctity & correctness of data, ensuring timely flow of data,
correct usage of data. The effective governance model would resolve any conflict
216
which can have altered brand impact, loss of market edge, loss of any financial
transactions etc.
• Financial Governance: The entire collaboration backbone success would
depend on how financial transparency is integrated with the collaboration
process. The financial governance would include validation of monetary
transactions between the collaborating stakeholders, profit and loss statements
in virtue of the collaboration done against all investment cost, infrastructure
cost etc. The governance team would take a call off on whether the
collaboration is achieving the target objective of financial benefits between the
stakeholders and whether it makes sense to continue the collaboration or call it
off.
Researchers here promote the implementation of blockchain technology for
adherence to security of financial transactions and decentralization of
transaction approvals.
• Data Stewardess: Data would play a very important role in governance of this
collaboration from multiple perspectives. Hence seamless data stewarding
process and methodology would be required so that data flow between the
stakeholders, data abstraction between the interfaces and integration methods,
data validation for accuracy and correctness could be ensured. Data flow and
usage will support the financial governance team to ensure if the collaboration
is going in the right direction and also ensure that financial transactions are
valid.
Researchers recommend having a collaborative cross functional team for
defining the methodology for data creation, data usage, data flow and data
governance.
217
• Brand adoption governance: This would be a sensitive topic for governance as
no e-commerce player would like to compromise on their brand value. Brand
value will focus on aspects like customer loyalty, market outreach, product
catalogue on offer and product quality etc. The e-commerce vendors or the
partners would not like to come over situation where their brand value comes
on stake and the customer loyalty shifts from one e-commerce vendor to
another because of dissatisfaction.
Brand governance would also be directly impacting financial governance as a
decrease in the brand value would directly affect the collaboration quality and
status. Hence it would be important to the stakeholders to define in the
collaboration approach how brand value and brand security is protected for an
organization.
• Market coverage governance: Along with brand security assurance, the e-
commerce vendors and the supply chain partners will have a direct interest in
the market coverage which will make them market pioneers or market leaders
in their business area. There should be a governance forum which would
distribute market coverage in a proper distribution ratio to all stakeholders

depending on the investment contribution ratio, collaboration expenditure ratio
and other tangible and/ or intangible contributions done to make the
collaboration framework sustainable and successful.
• SLA & KPI governance: To ensure that the collaboration is efficient, smooth
and effective, there has to be SLAs and KPIs defined and agreed. The agreed
KPIs and SLA parameters should then undergo logging & monitoring, analysis,
reporting and finally leading to decision making. The SLAs & KPIs would
relate to business processes monitoring, technology adoptions monitoring and
218
would play a very meaningful role in deciding if the collaboration methodology
is running smoothly or need to be made more efficient. Some of the KPIs for
the business processes are defined by the research author but every
collaboration organization/ stakeholder would need to define their own KPIs
and SLAs to monitor, analyze and then decide for future course of actions. It
should be noted that this is a very strategic step to ensure that every stakeholder
is working on making the collaboration successful by adhering to the defined
SLAs & KPIs.
Researcher proposes a collaboration governance model depicted as below:
Figure-82
Collaboration Governance Model
Source: Author
219
The above proposed collaboration governance model has three layers of
governance:
• Core Base Layer Governance: This layer is the core horizontal layer of governance on
which multiple governance structures will be placed. This core base layer will have
two important governance playing a vital role which would be Security Governance
Framework and KPI – SLA monitoring. The Security Governance framework will
provide strong security practices using various frameworks like ISO270001, COBIT,
PCI-DSS etc. extending security practices on Data and Business processes.

At the same time, there would be another layer of governance structure which would
deal with KPI and SLA adherence to business processes and technology adoption.
There would be various dashboards which would allow the key decision makers to
understand the various aspects of adherence to data and how to optimize the business
process and data interoperability as well as interchange for efficiency and productivity
increase.
• Vertical Tower Layer Governance: Researcher author suggests three verticals owning
respective governance for Operations, Technology Adoption and Financials. The
Operations governance would focus on how the business processes integration

between various stakeholders is being managed and monitored. There would be SLA
and KPIs dashboards to understand the success of business operations via integrated
stakeholders.
At the same time in technology collaboration, the governance framework would like
to observe how the technology adoption and sharing is done and used. This framework
would levy special notice to how the data from various technology landscape are
stored, reviewed and shared with other stakeholders. The technology governance also
review the investment in the technology collaboration.
220
Lastly, there would be a financial governance model which would review the financial
transactions between the shareholders & stakeholders. For any susceptive transactions
this governance team would take a final call to clear it out.
• Top Layer Governance: The top layer of governance would focus on investment
analysis from future technology perspective and the future collaboration within the
same or different geographies. The top-level governance team would ensure that the
various integrated-collaborated stakeholders do not land into brand threat and every
brand is safe and secure. The top-level governance team would also ensure financial
security of the stakeholders along with market share. The team would ensure that the
top financial contributors in the investment or collaboration or research &
development or process adherence gets the higher market share than others who are
just using the services.

Researcher proposes a collaboration maturity model which emphasizes on
collaboration maturity against different levels as shown in the picture below:
221
Figure-83
Collaboration Maturity Model
Source: Author
In this collaboration maturity model, researcher author divides the maturity levels
into 4 as below:
L0 Level of Maturity: This level responds to the survival of the business
stakeholders. In L0 level of maturity it is understood that the business stakeholders work
in silos for as-is state. There are no collaborations, and every stakeholder is for themselves
in terms of investments, research & development, challenges etc. Since there are no
collaborations, the cost of operations are high, market reach is limited and technology
adoption rate is low.
L1 Level of Maturity: This level of maturity is directed towards growth of the
business collaboration. In L1 level of maturity collaboration starts forming between various
supply chain stakeholders and they start easing out their pain areas by taking each other’s
support. The SLAs and KPIs are roughly designed, and they are monitored to make the
basic needs of collaboration become a success.
222
L2 Level of Maturity: This level of maturity stress on sustenance of the
collaboration. In L2 level of maturity, maturity scale index is high as compared to L1 level
of maturity. There are more collaborations in terms of integrating business processes, data
sharing between stakeholders, technology and know-how sharing between competitors &
partners. There are KPI and SLAs which are more mature and have right monitoring for
collaboration to reach its peak.
L3 Level of Maturity: This level of maturity takes collaboration to the next level,
and it promotes the stakeholders of the collaborative governance model to scale it to other
stakeholders who have not yet joined the collaboration engine wagon. At this level of
maturity, the investments are planned for future visions, discussions are around how to
manage brand security and market share of business (SOB). At this stage of maturity, it is
taken for granted that the maturity model wheel will keep the system running clean.
To ensure that the above collaboration framework is successful, there is a need for
a technology solution supporting the collaborative framework with technology stack – data
sharing and best practices. The researcher proposes a framework depicting the technology
to be adopted at various stakeholder’s level. The proposed technology stack is as below:
223
Figure-84
Technology stack solution
Source: Author
Li E. et. al. (2011) introduces collaborative commerce as a means to integrate
information from different integration touch points. It is very clear there would be two
important technology spaces as below:
• Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (AI-ML) adoption for:
o Machine learning algorithm to provide predictive analysis of products needed by
online buyers and prepare to ship beforehand to nearest fulfilment center. For
example: Amazon has developed a pre-shipping algorithm which can predict to
a level of accuracy what can the customer demand based on his previous orders
and searches.
o Artificial intelligence and machine learning for implementing robots and cobots
to assist in managing warehouse and logistics process.
224
o Machine learning algorithm for automated assignment of order pickup from a
specific fulfillment center – assignment to a delivery resource (either a physical
delivery person or an autonomous vehicle) based on best available one –
optimized routing for delivery.
o AI-ML algorithms for delivery vehicle routing optimizations (VRO) as below:
 Non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSDA-II) to find initial rider in
the first stage.
 Principal component analysis (PCA) algorithm fused with k-means to merge
customer orders and generate initial delivery routing to solve vehicle routing
problem (VRP)
 Adaptive large neighborhood search (ALNS) to improve quality of initial
solutions and finding optimal number of riders and final delivery routing at
second stage.
 Vehicle Routing pickup and delivery problem with time window
(VRPDPTW) to optimize delivery based on three constraints: time window,
capacity and coupling of pickup node of each request against delivery node
in the same route.
 Multi-compartment vehicle routing problem (MCVRP) to minimize number
of trips taken by delivery vehicles in the same route.
 Last mile delivery using drone integrated with delivery pickup from
fulfilment center and delivering it at the requested address.
Stamadianos T. et. al. (2023) has published two different papers where they talk
about vehicle routing problems with drones, electric vehicles and a GRASP
approach for energy minimization with electric vehicles.
• Integrated digital applications for real time data analysis based on:
225
o Order delivery sequence with optimized routing view
o Current location of the delivery boy(s)/ autonomous vehicle(s)
o Current weather conditions for a geographical location
o Current traffic conditions for a geographical location
o Current delivery status with optimized route information
o Dashboard stating any failure of SLAs or KPIs
6.3 Recommendations for Future Research
Researcher after doing his data analysis and documenting his views in this research
paper, believes strongly, that this is a strong subject with potential to bring oprational
efficiency, seamless tracking cadence, safety & security of delivey partners within quick
commerce independent of any geographical location. He also believes that further
researches should be carried out as below:
a. Since this research data was collected primarily from the questionnaires sent to the
respective stakeholders of this research, and, all the questions were closed ended hence
it did not provide any opportunity for the respondents to express their opinions on the
various topics of this subject. Researcher stronly believes that there should be
additional research to be done using the same category of stakeholders (not necessarily
same respondents) where-in the responses should be backed by views/ opinions. In
this way, a great amount of information can be extracted which will shed more light
on operation challenges, technology need, business need, geography & terrain
challenges etc. thereby providing a fresh view of further research to be conducted.
b. There should be research carried out on how co-sourcing and co-ownership model can
be implemented between e-commerce vendors, warehouse & logistics partners, and,
226
last mile delivery partners so that operating model can be shared between every
required stakeholder which certainly will:
• Reduce the cost of operations
• Bring higher efficiency in operations
• Develop localized vendors there-by createing more jobs in rural areas
• Adopt to technology advancements for better management and taking informed
decisions
This part of research should be conducted keeping in mind to preserve the brand value
and market leadership of all stakeholders who are part of the research.
c. A research from technology perspective should be carried out to deduce the
effectiveness of the framework suggested by the researcher in section 6.2. Intent of
this re-evaluation would be single out any sort of biasness in the framework.
d. There should be further research on ‘collaboration commerce’ framework and
governance model (as described in Section 6.2) suiting to the current environment and
legal policies and procedures as the previous ones are outdated and they do not cover
the change of socio-economic behaviour of current populations.
e. Researcher recommends for more detailed research to be undertaken regarding how to
implement the proposed collaboration maturity model (as displayed in section 6.2)
within last mile delivery process.
f. Researcher also recommends detail research on integrating the AI-ML algorithms like
NSDA-II, PCA, ALNS, VRPDPTW, MVVRP explained in section 6.2 so that an
efficient vehicle routing & delivery optimization method can be derived to support the
framework.
227
6.4 Conclusion
This research study presents the findings of online survey done with online buyers
who are using various e-commerce platforms. Based on the online buyers survey analysis,
the researcher concludes that:
a. There is a need of quick commerce, and it is supported by 64.5% of the respondents
who not only are voting for quick commerce but also are willing to pay extra for quick
delivery. This data supports the research theory of the researcher.
b. From the online buyers respondents data, there is a direct conclusion that some of the
e-commerce vendors are global players while there are many small local geographical
e-commerce vendors who also play an important role in last mile delivery. Apart from
top 13 e-commerce vendors selected (based on share of business) there were 24 other
e-commerce vendors, but with very less market share and hence they were not
considered for further analysis.
c. It is observed from the e-commerce questionnaires and interviews that e-commerce
vendors are owning end to end last mile delivery processes, however there are stages
in the entire supply chain where-in partnership is established with the local
geographical partners to serve online buyers better. However, it should be noted that
at e-commerce vendor level, it is not co-sharing model but work package based
revenue model.
d. From the questionnaires and interviews of warehouse & logistics, transporters and last
mile delivery partners, they understand and practice the concept of co-sharing model
and they have made changes in their business practices to invoke profits from such
engagements. As per the responses, around 25% to 30% of the supply partners believe
that they can have profit ranging from 5% to 30% while adhering co-sharing model.
228
e. On the technology front, it is evident that 100% of e-commerce vendors have been
spending on the technology adoption and based on the need of time, they have been
inducting various technology stacks in their business process for optimized way of
working. It is also clear that all e-commerce vendors are high on adoption for real time
data analysis and Artitificial Intelligence - Machine Learning programs.
During the research, there could not be found conclusive research to setup a
complete framework supporting quick last mile delivery using co-sharing and co-
ownership model, however, there were many individual research on supporting to solve
individual problems like delivery routing problems with sliding time window, multiple
compartment delivery routing problems, price sensitive inventory solving problems, on-
demand delivery from multiple local partners etc. but no research has been done to integrate
all these problems and provide a common framework.
Although the research does provide a basis of communized framework for adopting
co-sharing/ co-ownership of physical resources and technology model but this research
data is more inclined towards India geography and would need more research in future to
make a generalized framework for the global economy and global economy supply chain.
229
REFERENCES
Aslam W., Hussain A., et. al. (2019). Underlying Factors Influencing Consumers Trust and Loyalty
in e-commerce. Business Perspective and Research, Volume 8(2), 186-204.
htps://doi.org/10.1177/2278533719887451
Auad R., Erera A.,Savlsberg M., (2022). Dynamic courier capacity acquisi�on in rapid delivery
systems: a deep Q-learning approach. ResearchGate (2022).
htps://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.36009.67681
Banerjee, D., Erera A., et. al. (2020). Fleet Sizing and Service Region Par��oning for Same-Day
Delivery systems. Transportation Science, Volume 56. htps://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2022.1125
Beneich C., Douiri S., (2023). Solving the Mul� Compartment Vehicle Rou�ng Problem using a
Hybridized Simulated Annealing Algorithm. International Journal of Applied and Computational
Mathematics, Volume 9. htps://doi.org/10.1007/s40819-023-01609-0
Cao T., (2019). AI Development and Trends in e-commerce. SyncedReview. Retrieved June 22,
2019 from htps://syncedreview.com/2019/06/22/ai-development-and-trends-in-e-commerce.
Chernukhina, G., Ermolovskaya O., (2021). Development of Dark Stores as a Compe��ve Form of
Delivery of Goods. Journal of Modern Competition, Volume 15, 50-59. htps://doi.org/
10.37791/2687-0657-2021-15-4-50-59
Chen Q., Jin Y., (2010). A framework of awareness for Collabora�ve e-Commerce. IEEE, Volume
2010, 33-36. htps://doi.org/10.1109/CSCWD.2010.5472005
Dr. Heiling, L., (2018). The Intelligent Supply Chain – From Vision to Reality. Institute of
Information Systems, University of Hamburg
Drexi M., (2021). On the one-to-one pickup-and-delivery problem with �me windows and
trailers. Central European Journal of Operations Research, Volume 29(3), 1115-1162.
htps://doi.org/10.1007/S10100-020-00690-W
Frank M., Ostermeier M., Holzapfel A. et. al., (2020). Op�mizing rou�ng and delivery paterns
with mul�-compartment vehicles. European Journal of Operational Research, Volume 293.
htps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2020.12.033
Gayathri K., Praseetha P., (2020). Last Mile Delivery by Drone. IJERT – ECLECTIC, Volume 2K20.
Hargrave M., (2023). Collabora�ve Commerce: What it is, How it Works. Investopedia, New York,
U.S
Johnson D., Chaniotakis E., (2021). Innova�ve last mile delivery concepts: Evalua�ng last mile
delivery using a traffic simulator. 2021 7th International Conference on Models and Technologies
230
for Intelligent Transportation Systems, Volume MT-ITS 2021. htps://doi.org/10.1109/MT-
ITS49943.2021.9529279
Juan, P., (2022), Design of a two-echelon last-mile delivery model. Euro Journal on
Transportation and Logistics, Chile
Judah, P. , (2021). Use of Ar�ficial Intelligence in Last Mile Delivery. SHS Web of Conferences,
Slovakia, Volume 92, 4011-4027. htps://doi.org/10.1051/SHSCONF/20219204011
Khare, A., (2022). Dark Store – A Fresh Mushrooming Concept of Delivery At Door Step.
Maharatta Journal, India
Kim S., Smari W., (2005). On a collabora�ve commerce framework and architecture for next
genera�on commerce. IEEE, Volume 2005, 282-289.
htps://doi.org/10.1109/ISCST.2005.1553324
Kiniulis M., (2022). 9 Mind-Blowing Worldwide Ecommerce Sta�s�cs. MarkingBlog. Retrieved

June 8, 2022 from htps://www.markinblog.com/ecommerce-
sta�s�cs/#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20retail%20e%2Dcommerce,billion%20people%20in%20the
%20world.
Kronmueller, M., Feilbaum A., et. al. (2021). On-Demand Grocery Delivery From Mul�ple Local
Stores with Autonomous Robots. International Symposium on Multiple-robot and multiple-
system agents.
Li E, Du T, (2011). Collabora�ve Commerce. Advances in Electronic Business, Volume 1.

htps://doi.org/10.4018/9781591403814.ch001.ch000
Liu Z., Li Y., Xu J. et. al., (2024). Mul�-Compartment Electric Vehicle Rou�ng Problem for
Perishable Products. International Journal of Crowd Science, Volume 8, 38-48.
htps://doi.org/10.26599/IJCS.2023.9100017
Lutz, R., (2014). Adap�ve Large Neighbourhood Search – A heuris�c for the Rich Pickup and
Delivery Problem with Time Windows. University of Ulm, Germany
McClure B., (2023). Partnerships for ecommerce businesses: A Powerhouse for Increased
Revenue, Brand Awareness and Engagement. BigCommerce Website, Sydney, Australia
Okhrem, P., (2022). Drone Delivery: Benefits, Obstacles, and the Future of the new ecommerce
trends. Data Driven Investor Journal, U.S.
Ostermeier M., Henke T., et. al. (2021). Mul�-compartment vehicle rou�ng problems: State-of-
the-art, modeling framework and future direc�ons. European Journal of Operational Research,
292(3), 799-817. htps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2020.11.009
231
Reid, H., (2022). Top 9 Last Mile Delivery Trends to Watch. DCL Logistics, San Francisco, U.S.
Reyes, D., (2018). The Meal Delivery Rou�ng Problem. Decision Engineering Department,
Chicago
Skoufi E., Filiopoulo E., et. al., (2021). Last Mile Delivery by Drone: a Technoeconomic Approach.
Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and
Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), Volume 13072 LNCS, 27-35. htps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
030-92916-9_3
Stamadianos T., Kyriakakis N., Marinaki M. et. al., (2023). Rou�ng Problems with Electric and
Autonomous Vehicles: Review and Poten�al for Future Research. Operations Research Forum,
Volume 4(2), 46-48. htps://doi.org/10.1007/s43069-023-00228-1
Stamadianos T., Kyriakakis N., Marinaki M. et. al., (2023). A GRASP Approach for the Energy-
Minimizing Electric Vehicle Rou�ng Problem with Drones. World Electric Vehicle Journal, Volume
14, 354-358. htps://doi.org/10.3390/wevj14120354
Verona G., Prandelli E., (2002). A Dynamic Model of Customer Loyalty to Sustain Compe��ve
Advantage on the Web. European Management Journal, Volume 20(3), 299-309.
htps://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-2373(02)00046-4
Wang W., Jiang L., (2022). Two-Stage Solu�on for Meal Delivery Rou�ng Op�miza�on on Time-
Sensi�ve Customer Sa�sfac�on. Journal of Advanced Transportation, Volume 2022, 1-15.
htps://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9711074
Zhang Y., Guo W., et. al. (2022). Synchromodal transport planning with flexible services:
Mathema�cal model and heuris�c algorithm. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging
Technologies, Volume 140. htps://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRC.2022.103711
232
APPENDIX A
SURVEY COVER LETTER
For the online survey, the researcher had to send mails to the various e-commerce
vendors and warehouse & logistics partners. All such mails had a cover letter requesting
for audience for filling up the questionnaires. The mail content is pasted as below:
Hello <Name of the recipient>,
Through this mail I would like to introduce myself to you, as Praveen Kumar
Mishra, a Doctoral Research Scholar with Swiss School Of Business Management (SSBM),
Geneva, Switzerland, currently undergoing dissertation thesis preparation on the topic of
bringing operational and cost efficiency in last mile delivery under e-commerce supply
chain.
In this regard, I have already submitted my Research Proposal (RP) to the board
and that has been accepted, provisioning me to write my thesis on the subject and submit
my findings.
Having said so, I intend to explore an opportunity to integrate with you and request
you to please participate in an online survey of around 25 questions which would not take
more than 30 minutes of your time. The intent of the questionnaire is not to ask your
personal details or opinions but to have some facts of the organisation which is public in
nature and these responses will assist me to support my findings and complete my thesis.
To let you know more about me, I am an Indian professional with 25+ years of
experience and currently employed with Volkswagen Group Technology Solutions India
where I am heading Engineering Delivery.

I would be very thankful if you respond back to this mail or guide me to the best
person who could respond to my questionnaire and I can send him the online survey link
233
which would allow me to complete my Global Doctor of Business Administration (GDBA)
course from SSBM, Geneva, Switzerland.
Your’s truly,
Mobile: 8308824290
WhatsApp Number: 8308824290
An artifact of mail image sent is pasted below:
Figure-85
Mail Artifact for e-commerce supply chain players
Source: Author’s Mail Image
234
At the same time, for the online buyer users, I had written a request on my linkedin
to participate in the online survey, whose screenshot is as below:
Figure-86
Invitation for online survey to online buyers
Source: Author’s LinkedIn Image
235
APPENDIX B
INFORMED CONSENT
Researcher author, is also an employee of Volkswagen Group Technology
Solutions, India (VWITS) and holding a position of Head – Engineering Delivery. Being
an employee and using the organization name in the mails for various CxOs of the e-
commerce vendors, warehouse & logistics partners and transport partners, it was
imperative for me to take the informed consent from the Chief People Officer (CPO) and
Head Delivery of the organization. Hence, researcher wrote to the CPO and Head Delivery
and informed about the DBA program and the intended use of Volkswagen name, also
assuring that the DBA program does not contradict or compete with the nature of our
business. The consent was provided to the researcher after legally scrutinizing the DBA
program, research practices and the mail content sent to various stakeholders of the
research. Screenshot of the mail pasted below:
Figure-87
Consent request from organization to use name
Source: Image from Author’s mailbox
236
APPENDIX C
INTERVIEW GUIDE
{Sample Text Sample Text Sample Text Sample Text Sample Text Sample Text
Sample Text }
237

In Par Al Fulfilment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

In Par Al Fulfilment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

In Par Al Fulfilment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS AND PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS

FOR “THE LAST MILE DELIVERY” SUPPLY CHAIN

Praveen Kumar Mishra, MCA, MBA (IT)

DOCTOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

SWISS SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT GENEVA

Praveen Kumar Mishra

journey of my Global Doctor of Business Administration (GDBA) program, which I started

– learning – self-actualizing and I want to explicitly dedicate my final thesis to my father

program alongside my stringent and highly demanding professional life.

gotten converged to my final thesis document of GDBA program.

will-power to bring my DBA journey to this level.

benefit industries anytime in future. His commitment to validate my research topic,

output of his efforts taken for me to accomplish my DBA journey.

contents to achieve my goals.

Lastly, I would also like to acknowledge my colleagues in Volkswagen Group IT as they

Praveen Kumar Mishra

Disserta�on Chair: <Chair’s Name>

List of Tables ............................................................................................................... xvi

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................ 1

CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................................. 8

2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................ 8

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY .............................................................................. 29

3.1 Overview of the Research Problem ................................................... 29

CHAPTER IV: RESULTS ........................................................................................... 86

4.1 Research questions for online buyers ................................................ 89

CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION ..................................................................................... 175

5.1 Discussion of Results...................................................................... 175

CHAPTER VI: SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....... 205

6.1 Summary ........................................................................................ 205

APPENDIX A SURVEY COVER LETTER ............................................................. 233

APPENDIX B INFORMED CONSENT ................................................................... 236

Kiniulis M. (2022) in its study of “e-commerce conversion rates-2022” has

Source: MarkinBlog Site ‘World wide e-commerce sta�s�cs’ - 2022

co-ownership for managing last mile delivery 20 to 30 minutes.

1.2 Research Problem

framework will have some challenges as below:

done in next 30 minutes from packaging at warehouse to last mile delivery?

delivering fast and saving on insurance, accidents & repair costs?

same with other supply chain partners working with them?

using technology which promotes reducing carbon footprints?

the above-mentioned challenges:

speed up end delivery time.

data and historical data available

1.3 Purpose of Research

a. Proposed technology advancements using Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine

vehicles for last mile delivery.

strategic decisions on the fly.

d. Paradigm shift in e-commerce vendors operations working model from end-to-end

ownership to co-sourcing/ co-ownership business model for logistics – warehousing

and last mile delivery.

1.4 Significance of the Study

research, which are as below:

a. Co-sourcing and co-ownership partnership model with warehouses and delivery

dynamic shifting of customer loyalty.

pricing model or discounts or coupons.

in carbon footprint as well as a reduction in accidental as well as insurance claims.

e. Due to deep geographical penetration of e-commerce vendors in rural areas (based on

life and world more better.