Anda di halaman 1dari 113

STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TO IMPROVE RETAIL BUSINESS IN INDIA by SWAPNIL PANDE, B.E.M.S.

A THESIS IN INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING

Approved Dr. Terry Collins Chairperson of the Committee Dr. Milton Smith Dr. Iris Rivero

Accepted John Borrelli Dean of the Graduate School May, 2005

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to thank my dear Parents and Sister for their trust and continuous support. I dedicate my hard work and success to them. I would like to express my sincere thanks to the members of my Thesis Committee - Dr. Milton Smith and Dr. Iris Rivero. I would also like to thank, the Chair of my committee - Dr.Terry Collins and the former chair - Dr. Elliot Montes. Dr. Elliot Montes patiently and professionally guided me when I was in the middle of the ocean with this topic. Dr. Terry Collins had been a great help for survey methodology. His delegations were to the point and perfect. He pointed out things regarding the professional writing, which I never thought of before. Dr. Milton Smith was always available for the critical problems. Dr. Iris Rivero had been a support and motivation. Even though I have a good scope of improvement, I believe that this thesis has been a great learning experience to me. It is one step ahead to undertake further projects with more maturity. I would also like to thank Mr. Amit Ambekar, Marketing Manager Glaxo SmithKline (India), for the initial discussions which motivated me to take up this topic and also for his timely guidance. I also thank the players who gave me their opinion regarding the survey. I express my appreciation to the Industrial Engineering department, English department, Texas Tech library and a number of people who helped me at various stages. Last but not the least, I would like to thank my friends for their discussions and opinion.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background 1.2 Scope of Indian Retail Industry 1.3 Current Indian Retail Business 1.4 Problem area 1.5 Research Purpose 1.6 Research Questions 1.7 Significance 1.8 Limitations 1.9 Summery 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Systemic view 2.2 Information Technology implementation and Organizational behavior 2.3 Indian Retail Environment 2.3.1 Consumer Psychology 2.3.2 Buying Behavior 2.3.3 Recent Trends

ii vi vii viii 1 1 2 2 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 8 8 9 9 10 10

iii

2.3.4 Healthy signs for Organized Retail Business 2.4 The development of Supply Chain 2.5 Demand Chain Management 2.6 Economies of Sale 2.7 Demand distortion in Supply Chains 2.8 Cross-Docking and VMI 3 EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN 3.1 Design of Experiments (DOE) 3.2 Experimental Design 3.3 Research Instrument 3.4 Mail out procedures 3.5 Format of Survey Questionnaire 3.5.1 Classification of Questionnaire 3.5.2 Data Coding 3.5.3 Coding Data for Analysis 3.6 Data response 4 DATA ANALYSIS 4.1 Research Questions 4.2 Discussion of probable factors for the cause 4.3 Hypotheses 4.4 Conclusion 4.5 Implications

11 12 13 14 15 16 18 18 19 19 20 21 21 23 24 27 30 30 31 31 40 40

iv

5 RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 The Indian Supply chain architecture 5.2 Proposed model for supply chain 5.3 Logistics Supply Chain 5.4 Economies of Scale 5.5 Future Research 5.6 Closing REFERENCES APPENDICES A GLOSSARY B QUESTIONNAIRE C STATISTICAL OUTPUT D RETAIL ACCOUNTING REPORTS E WAL-MART - ECONOMIES OF SCALE F ECONOMIC GROWTH OF INDIA G SAS PROGRAM H RAW DATA

43 44 45 48 49 50 50 52 58 58 62 64 73 75 76 77 98

ABSTRACT

Overall retail business efficiency in India is 2 %, even though India is considered as one of the countries, where Information Technology (IT) is booming. With the survey and statistical tests, the level of IT implementation and Inventory Control Model (ICM) used by the companies were accessed. These were compared with the level of Demand and Supply Efficiency (DSE). The results implied that the efficiency of the supply chain is the efficiency of its weakest link. Merely implementing high tech IT wont solve the problem. Centralized Inventory Control Model (CICM) will be needed to reduce the bullwhip effect. The plan to implement the CICM, by suggesting the change in the supply chain architecture was written. This thesis work should be in the realm of consideration since only recently (September 2004), Retailers Association of India (RAI) has been formed with the goal to improve overall retail business in India.

vi

LIST OF TABLES

3.1 Data Coding 4.1 Hypotheses 1a and 1b 4.2 Hypothesis 2a 4.3 Hypothesis 2b 4.4 Hypothesis 3 4.5 Hypothesis 4a 4.6 Hypothesis 4b 4.7 DSE relationship between the firms implementing CICM and DICM

25 33 34 36 37 38 40 41

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1 Level of complication in Supply Chain 3.1 Distribution of Participating Players as per business category 3.2 Distribution of the participants as per the Size and ICM used 5.1 Snapshot of Indian Retail Supply Chain 5.3 Proposed knowledge supply chain 5.4 Proposed Logistics Supply Chain

13 28 29 44 46 49

viii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Contemporary retail business is chain oriented; therefore synchronization of demand and supply becomes a core question. The problems with the traditional vertical cooperation between organizations are extensive. Instead of cooperating, actors

dependent on each other have been seeking to achieve cost reductions or profit improvements at the expense of someone else in the supply chain. Companies engaging in transferring costs upstream or downstream arguably do not realize that such strategies will not make them more competitive, as all costs will ultimately make their way to the market in the form of increased end consumer prices. Information Technology (IT) can help achieve great benefits in terms of the agility and visibility of the information flow. But increased systematic coordination across company borders alleges the greatest demand for the IT to be successful (Helms, Ettkin, Chapman, 2000). The problem is very crucial in India. India has 98 % unorganized retail market. Unorganized business means that the demand and supply is made on an ad-hoc basis by each player of the supply chain thereby creating uncertainties in demand. Almost 50 % of the fruits and vegetables produced in India are lost in the supply chain. In tonnage terms, this is almost the amount that is consumed in Great Britain (McKinsey report, 2003). However, systematic implementation of Information Technology to improve the inventory management can make a very big difference in the present time.

1.2 Scope of Indian Retail Industry A joint report by McKinsey and Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) has pegged the Indian retail market at $180 billion. The market, according to the report, is growing at a steady rate of 11-12 % per year and it accounts for around 10 % of the countrys Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Sustained GDP growth rate in the last 10 years has already created a base of over 30 million consumers. Current economic

indicators seem favorable, and if a GDP growth rate of 6-7 % is maintained, India could see a 60 million affluent consumer base by 2010 (McKinsey, CII, 2003). In the year 2003, consumer spending has gone up by 9.6 % as compared to the previous year, which had shown a decline in spending (Appendix F). The growth in the year 2003 implies a rise in market opportunity for retailers, estimated to be in the range of 75 billion dollars among the Section A and B categories (upper and middle class population), in urban India alone (McKinsey, CII 2003).

1.3 Current Indian Retail Business In India, the consumer and the supplier are situated at the two ends of the chain, which is made up of the Supplier, Wholesaler, Distributor, Retailer and Consumer. The Supplier supplies the merchandise as per the orders received / perceived. The Supplier also does the function of warehousing and dispatching of the finished products. Distributors provides distribution service by processing, executing the orders and providing after-sales services. Clearing and Forwarding Agents (C&F) perform all the distribution functions. Distributors also function like C&F agents, with the only exception that they raise their own invoice and collect the dues. Retailer is the most

important link in the distribution chain. It is at this point of retail that a customer demand gets converted into a sale. By virtue of the location in the distribution chain, retailer is the most informed and qualified person to give information about the products. Retailer is very important for ensuring product availability and pre-call research and is also important for drawing up a good brand matrix.

1.4 Problem area In India, the enterprises are helped more with information about input supply like finance, skills and technology and less, as compared, with information about output demand like new and existing customers needs. Poor inventory management and supply chain management should be the big reasons for the lack of efficiency. IT is in a closed loop, and there is poor co-ordination and networking amongst the players of the system - manufacturer, distributors, wholesaler and retailers. The demand invisibility, long lead time, poor synchronization of supply and demand, leads to the demand distortion. Supply chain in India is badly adapted to provide sufficient service even to the key segments of the product range. The other critical problem is that supply is discontinuous, even for some Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG)! The increase in variability throughout the supply chain is partly a result of delays in information flow and miscalculating changes in consumer demand. The accumulation or draught of buffer stocks affects the order levels in each echelon, thus further delaying and distorting the information on changes in demand.

Globalization of the market and India considering to open the Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in the field of retail, has increased suppliers, manufacturers, brands, distribution and logistics partners. This has resulted in complex international supply network relationships. As a result, there is a lot of confusion in the system. This confusion is due to overreactions, unnecessary interventions, second guessing, mistrust and distorted information throughout the supply chain. This increased nervousness has lead to higher costs and inefficiencies through over-ordering inventory and then ordering too little. The existence of nervousness and chaos in a supply chain also means that it is impossible to make the right decisions for every player in a supply chain. The risk of making the wrong or ineffective decisions becomes the inevitable consequence. Ultimately, the supply chain is exposed to market risks, that is, missing the market opportunities. A supply chain can not be responsive to changing market trends and customer preferences if the right market signals can not be obtained. Finally, market opportunities can be missed when customer orders with short order lead times can not be met. Buffering is a means employed by supply chain managers to hedge against the uncertainties and risks in the supply chain. Excessive inventory leads to higher financial risks.

1.5 Research Purpose We need to understand the elements of the supply chain that reduce the confidence to perceive supply and demand. Without visibility and agility and with poor

inventory replenishment, it will be common that the supply chain is plagued with buffer inventories. IT infrastructure has developed rapidly, and it has the potential to bring the agility and visibility in the supply chain by passing on the information quickly between different players. Strategic implementation of IT can lessen (though not eliminate) the demand and supply inefficiency problem.

1.6 Research Questions The following questions are the focus points: 1) Why is the Retail business in India inefficient (India has only 2% of organized and efficient retail business) 2) What is the level of IT implementation to Small and Large players of the retail supply chain in India? 3) Is there any significant difference between the level of IT implementation and Demand and Supply Efficiency (DSE)? 4) Is there any significant difference between the Inventory Control Model (ICM) used and DSE? 5) Are the firms implementing the Centralized Inventory Control Model (CICM) more efficient in terms of DSE as compared to the firms implementing the Decentralized Inventory Control Model (DICM)? 6) Where in the supply chain should IT be implemented? 7) What should be the strategy (corresponding change in the supply chain architecture) to make the IT implementation more effective?

1.7 Significance Until recently in India, retailing had not been considered as an industry and there were only traders associations at the local levels. Now the Government has decided that there will be no taxes on electronic business or commerce transactions. According to International Data Corporation, with ongoing investment in bandwidth, development of shared Internet facilities and explosion in dot-com, a large base of users and shoppers are expected. This thesis work can be significant on the strategic level for planning the Supply Chain to best implement the Information Technology in India to improve the overall Retail Business. It should also serve as one of the references to the semi-government organization Retailers Association of India (RAI), working to improve the overall retail business efficiency in India. RAI has recently been established, in September 2004 (http://retailersassociationofindia.org/)

1.8 Limitations The questionnaire which is used as the research instrument is framed from the related literature review. Along with demand and supply inefficiency, there could be a number of reasons, which might be contributing for 98% unorganized retail business in India. However, since the scope of this thesis is IT and Supply Chain Management, other business processes are not discussed in detail. Also the recommendations given in Chapter 5 cannot be trusted as fool proof. However, they can be one of the ideas for future research. Building simulation models to test the design of recommended supply chain architecture and considering the demand

and supply management efficiency improvement and cost benefit analysis is suggested in the future research.

1.9 Summery Chapter 2 gives the literature review as a platform for the topic. Chapter 3 discusses Experimental Design, Research Instrument and Methodology used. Chapter 4 frames the Hypotheses and they are tested by the statistical analysis. Also, conclusions and implications of the results are mentioned in this chapter. Chapter 5 frames a strategy and gives the recommendations to implement the particular kind of IT to the Retail Business, particularly keeping the conditions of India in mind.

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review covers the concepts in the field of retail business on the global level, and it also gives a snapshot of the traditional retail business in India. Thus, it frames the groundwork for improving and adapting the ideas to the Indian retail business.

2.1 Systemic view The complexity of IT implementation exists at both Individual and System levels (Corso, Martini, Paolucci, Pellegrini, 2003). System complexity reflects the way in which components manufactured have to be distributed to the players of the system upon predicting the demand. The pattern of IT adoption should rather be analyzed in the frame of system complexity, which also includes customer, economy, organizational mechanism and management practice (Skilling, 1996).

2.2 IT implementation and Organizational behavior Knowledge driven development initiatives that make increased use of digital technologies can create opportunities to develop knowledge networks to address a range of development related problems (Walton, Gupta, 1999). Information Technology can provide significant improvements in efficiency across a company, but only when implemented correctly. Otherwise, IT system could be a curse and can drag the whole enterprise into spiraling inefficiency (Mandal, Gunasekaran, 2003). IT benefits cannot be fully realized unless a strong alignment and reconciliation mechanism is established

between technical and organizational imperatives (Mashari, Mudimigh, Zairi, 2002). The following part gives an Indian insight to the same.

2.3 Indian Retail Environment Indian retail market has around 12 million outlets and it is the largest retail outlet density in the world. However it has 98% unorganized retail market (CII - Mckinnsey, 2004). Market is controlled by a handful of distributors and wholesalers. Traditionally the retail business is run by small convenient stores, having shop in the front and house at the back. More than 99% retailers function in less than 500 square feet. Most of these outlets have very basic offerings, fixed prices and no ambience. These are highly competitive stores due to cheap land prices and labor. Also, these stores avoid the taxes as they belong to a small industry sector (Banerjee, 2004). Generally the accounts of trading are not maintained separately. The educational qualification level of these retailers is low. Information Technology is, as if, unimportant for the stores, due to its small size and small business. But due to the poor inventory management in the lower tiers, the upper tiers and finally the end customers has to suffer in terms of demand invisibility and transferred cost respectively.

2.3.1 Consumer Psychology The majority of middle class Indian consumers are wary of large retail formats with well-stocked shelves (Aggarwal, Singh, 2004). They are considered to have overpriced goods, even though they sell at the government mandate Maximum Retail

Price (MRP). Smaller stores often stay open beyond normal working hours and work on low margins because they employ cheap labor and have lower overheads. Such outlets attract customers in large numbers. Also consumers have the notion that large shops spend on promoting themselves and pass on the cost to the consumer. Retail format should be one of the factors which should be taken into consideration since; this is one of the reasons for failure of Wal-Mart in Indonesia (Robert Slator, 2002).

2.3.2 Buying Behavior Traditionally, the housewife handles the procurement of groceries in any house, and she is the prime decision maker. Majority of the times, the customers are loyal to the retailer if no particular incentive is available in any other shop. The retailer has an excellent personal relationship with the family of the customer and he stays in vicinity. At times, he also gives monthly credit to his customers and maintains a log book of the purchases of the customer over time. Normally, the retailer is changed if there is a new person who is offering a lower price, better quality or better service. The Indian

customer normally does not go to a distant place for groceries because of lack of mobility or the cost involved in mobility. However, he is prepared to go to places for buying apparels or electronic items which are high involvement products (Mckinsey, CII, 2004).

2.3.3 Recent Trends Sustained GDP growth rate in the last 10 years has already created a base of over 30 million consumers. Current economic indicators seem favorable, and if a GDP growth

10

rate of 6-7 % can be maintained, a 60 million affluent consumer base is possible by 2010 (CII - Mckinsey, 2004). Now, with the Government considering to open the Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs) in retail sector, the entry of multi-national retail chains would change the entire retail scenario of the country. As per the National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER), almost 40 percent of Indias high income urban population accounts for the 20-25 largest cities with a population of more than one million. Therefore, most retail formats in these markets would be seeing a change from Small Enterprise to the Super centers (Sinha, Banerjee, 2004). Food sales constitute a high proportion of total retail sales. The share was 62.7% in 2003 and was worth approximately Rs 7,039.2 billion. Other segments having high or substantial share in Indian retail include the apparel and the electronic sector.

2.3.4 Healthy signs for Organized Retail Business In the year 2003, the customer spending had gone up by 9.6 per cent compared to the previous year. The growth in 2003 implies a rise in market opportunity for retailers, estimated to be in the range of 150 billion Rupees, among the Section A and B categories (upper and middle class), in urban India alone (Hanna, 2004). Earlier, customers used to look for value of money first with quality being second decision parameter. But nowadays, due to branding and exposure to media, consumers look first at the quality of products and then look for value of money. Hence business with the big suppliers providing the branded merchandise will spring up more (Kinra, 1995).

11

Information Technology, Quality Control, Training and streamlining operations to improve efficiencies are becoming the focus areas for industry assortment, innovation and planning for customer retention.

2.4 Development of Supply Chains The network character of the supply chain is important and the key issues in the management of the network are responsiveness, reliability and relationships (McLaren, Head, Yuan, 2002). The global nature of Ex-4 Wall supply chain (inter-organizational supply chain) raises the problem of global versus local control. Global co-ordination, local management should be an approach for devising activities for global and local categories (McLaren, Head, Yuan, 2002). The global activities include, for example, information building the players of the supply chain, network systems development, sourcing route structuring,

decisions and contracts. The local

activities include local customer service, inventory control, manufacturing, management, etc. The division of Supply Chain can be illustrated by the four levels of complications, as shown in Figure 2.1.

12

1) Internal chain 2) Dyadic relationship

3) External chain

4) Network

Figure 2.1 Level of complication in Supply Chain The retail supply chains usually are the Network type - the complex ones, because most products are not seized from single site. It also has a pool of players to be chosen in any category. Hence the flow of information through this dense network should be agile as well as systematic, to avoid demand distortion.

2.5 Demand Chain Management The demand chain management concept emphasizes that the primary control of the material flow should be the customer demand (Kotzab, 1999). Demand chain management thinking leads to a customer-centric design of the supply chain. Order Penetration Point (OPP) is the point in the supply chain where products are allocated to a specific customer order (Andries, 1995). OPP in the supply chain

13

is often discussed in conjunction with the term postponement. Postponement can be applied to form, time and place. Form postponement means that companies delay production, assembly or even planning and design until after the customer has placed an order. This increases the ability to fine tune products to specific customer wishes. Time and place postponement or logistics postponement means that the forward movement of goods is delayed to the last possible place or moment in the chain of operations and goods are kept in storage in the distribution chain (Prasad, 1995). The positioning of the OPP has a crucial impact on the supply chain responsiveness and needed inventory levels. If the OPP is positioned near the end customer, the delivery time is shorter, but uncertainty and the risks for the manufacturer are higher. If the OPP is positioned far up-stream, the inventory risks are lower, but the service level to the customer is lower. The lowest risk to the supplier is to have the OPP in manufacturing which eliminates the need for inventories. On the other hand, this might mean long delivery times and low service levels to the customers and the final decision is a trade-off between cost and service level as opposed to competition.

2.6 Economies of Sale There are three types of economies to be achieved with the supply chain approach on the systems level: economies of scale, economies of scope and economies of speed (Shaw, Nisbet, Dawson, 2001). Economies of scale in the supply chain convert into money in two ways - greater bargaining power and lower unit costs, both being based on sheer volume. Economies of scope means the benefit of being able to share

14

resources across products, markets and businesses. Economies of speed means the ability to react quickly to changing customer requirements, and improved performance that is based on better sharing of control information. To be able to realize the benefits, the network has to communicate openly and have common goals. Economies of the sales make Every Day Low Price (EDLP) philosophy possible. EDLP is probably one of the most difficult pricing strategies for any retail business to execute. It requires a level of discipline that most retailers do not have. Trust has to be built with the consumers over a period of years convincing them that the business will promote and that the consumer will still be better off, receiving the lowest price for a basket of goods (Moyer, 1991). EDLP offers many operational advantages as well. EDLP allows for more accurate forecasting and combined with POS data sharing with suppliers, helps reduce inventory throughout its supply chain improving inventory efficiency for both retailers and their suppliers (Tarascio, 1997). A second cost advantage of EDLP is that it does not require the kind of continuous price-item advertising that high-low pricing retailers must do.

2.7 Demand distortion in Supply Chains Forrester made simulation experiments with supply chains and described how a small change in market demand can lead to a substantial change in demand for the manufacturer (Forrester, 1992). In his model a 10 percent variation in demand caused a variation of over 50 percent for the manufacturer. Forrester suggested that the prime reasons for the demand amplification were long supply chains with time delays in

15

information processing, long lead times and different control policies for orders and inventories (Brito, 2001).

2.8 Cross-Docking and VMI On the physical distribution side, one of the most important innovations has been cross-docking (Kinnear, 1997). In cross-docking, the products delivered to a warehouse are sorted, reloaded and transported to the stores without ever staying in the inventory. In addition to an efficient distribution strategy, Wal-Mart implemented a new approach to inventory control together with Procter & Gamble. It gave the control of inventories to the supplier. This new approach is called Vendor Managed Inventory (VMI). In a working VMI-arrangement the supplier is able to see the real demand with the help of Point of Sale (POS) data, which is often called Electronic Point of Sale (EPoS) if transmitted electronically. Based on the actual sales information and inventory levels in the stores, the vendor makes the replenishment decisions concerning the quantities, shipping and timing. This eliminates the ordering and purchase decision process, thus reducing the distortion of demand information in the supply chain. The benefits of VMI are a better utilization of resources in production, transportation and a reduction of inventory levels. The suppliers buffer stocks can be smaller due to the smoother demand signal. Additionally, the supplier has more freedom to co-ordinate the replenishment process proactively, instead of responding reactively to purchase orders. This literature review is viewed as groundwork to frame the questionnaire. From the questionnaire framed, the current picture of level of IT implementation to the retail

16

business in India will be developed. The level of efficiency or inefficiency of small and large firms and the firms implementing Centralized or Decentralized inventory model, in terms of the inventory management will be confirmed. A strategy is further formulated where in the recommendations are made with regards to the kind of IT implementation and change in the organizational structure for the smooth operation.

17

CHAPTER 3 EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN This chapter deals with the Experimental Objective, Experimental Design and Research Instrument. The concluding part of the chapter shows the classification of survey respondents with respect to the size of the firm, ICM used and category of the players, in the form of graphical representation. 3.1 Design of Experiments (DOE) DOE is a branch of applied statistics dealing with planning, conducting, analyzing and interpreting controlled tests to evaluate the factors that control the value of a parameter or group of parameters. For any experiment, the following steps are followed. Determining the experimental objective Determining the factors and responses Designing the experiment to meet the objective Collecting the data Analyzing the data with statistics Reporting the experimental results Designing a new experiment

With the above guideline, the further part of the thesis is proposed.

18

3.2 Experimental Design To develop the strategy of Information Technology (IT) implementation to improve the Retail Business efficiency, a survey was conducted with Small and Large: Retailers, Wholesalers, Distributors, Suppliers and Consultants, in India. The research instrument used was a questionnaire. It was useful to know the hidden reasons for demand and supply management in India being unorganized, even though India is considered as one of the countries where IT is booming. From the questionnaire, the current level of IT implementation to Small and Large players of the retail supply chain in India was confirmed. With respect to the level of IT implementation and ICM used: Centralized Inventory Control Model (CICM) or Decentralized inventory Control Model (DICM), the level of Demand and Supply Efficiency (DSE) of the firms was assessed. Accordingly, sectors were marked in the supply chain, where IT can bring about considerable change. A strategy (network route structuring, information systems development, sourcing decisions, corresponding change in the supply chain architecture) to make the implementation more effective was further recommended.

3.3 Research Instrument A research instrument in terms of a questionnaire was used for this research. Human subject approval was received from Institutional Review Board (IRB) for the Protection of Human Subjects (Texas Tech University Protocol # 100157). questionnaire is shown in Appendix B. The

19

For more response rate, the paper based survey was suggested considering large and small players whose opinion was needed. The questionnaire was sent to the Mumbai (India) based firm DataPro. DataPro is a personnel consultant and is in association with the Nirmal Vyapar Kendra (Business Associations). The postage paid mail data collection was requested to the company. This was done because, it was more costly and time consuming to send mails to Indian firms directly from the United States along with the returned envelope. It was found that companies in India are reluctant to write a survey unless there is some incentive, contacts or a professional service associated.

3.4 Mail out procedures The survey was sent in the English language, early in November and it was received back in January. Thus, it took almost three months for data collection. Since it was a paid survey, everything was more organized. Initially 150 surveys were sent to DataPro. The link to the survey, which was available online, was also sent to the company so that in case, DataPro need more survey papers, then they could always take printouts. The survey was passed to the local traders associations and their supply chain partners through out the country. Therefore, the data collected was random. Finally ninety-four surveys were collected and three of them were excluded due to incomplete data. Thus, ninety-one surveys were considered for further analysis. As per the IRB protocol, the names of the participants were kept confidential.

20

3.5 Format of Survey Questionnaire The survey is based on the literature review, regarding the IT tools commonly used in the retail supply chain and the common problems which primarily make retail business inefficient. The survey consists of nine questions and their sub questions. All questions (except question 2) are closed-ended questions. With close ended questions, the participant is not required to be articulate; hence misinterpretation of the opinion is avoided. Also the coding with the closed ended format happens to be tangible. Nominal Scale is used in Section 1 and 4 which allows counting the number of occurrences of each value and thus help segments the data. Section 2, 3 and 5 use the Ordinal Scale. Likert scale is used to rank the points in the scale of 1 5. The captions of 1-5 are mentioned in the data coding table 3.1, below.

3.5.1 Classification of Questionnaire Section 1 (Q 1 Q 5) help to classify the firms as big or small sized and by the type of the company (Supplier / Distributor / Wholesaler / Retailer / Consultant). This helps to determine the firms position, in the current Indian retail supply chain architecture. Thus Section 1 is for the data segmentation. Section 2 (Q 6.1 Q 6.5) access the level of IT implementation to the big / small players of the supply chain. Broadly the core functions where IT implementation can improve the supply chain management are selected for this section. It is accessed if the core areas are efficiently IT implemented or not.

21

The extent and efficiency of IT implementation in: 6.1 Checking vendor's performance history to supply the demanded merchandise 6.2 Checking the finished good inventory level 6.3 Generating demand and sales forecast 6.4 Accessing the database having the information about inventory availability, price and order status etc. 6.5 Synchronizing with the players of Supply chain in terms of infrastructure for information exchange Section 3 (Q 7.1 Q 7.5) aims to access the level of implementation of common Information transfers tools, for data collection, data transfer, data analysis and data processing, which, if implemented correctly, can help improve retail business. The extent and efficiency of the following IT tools usage: 7.1 Electronic Cash Registers (EPoS) - With this system, a bar code on a product is scanned and the computer removes the scanned item from stock figures (Used for Electronic point of sale (EPoS) - for inventory tracking and management). 7.2 Radio Frequency Identification device: RFID is a system which converts the radio waves, reflected back from the RFID tag, into digital information which can be used for efficient inventory management and improving supply chain management 7.3 Electronic data Interchange: EDI enables retailers to integrate their purchasing / selling activities with their suppliers. 7.4 Quick Response delivery System: QRDS helps to commute the information for quick (point of sale) replenishment.

22

7.5 Decision Support System: DSS is a computer program application that analyzes business data and presents it so that users can make business decisions more easily. Section 4 (Q 8.1) classifies the firms with respect to the inventory control policy used; as Centralized or Decentralized. In CICM, all stages base their forecast on the end customer demand data. In DICM, all stages base their forecast on the lower tiers data. It is seen if the firms implementing CICM are more efficient than firms implementing the DICM. Section V (Q 9.1 Q 9.5) marks some of the prominent problems which are faced by the retail supply chain in terms of demand distortion, as mentioned The degree of Supply and demand distortion: 9.1 The lower tier / Customer, over-order to buffer the stock, to hedge against uncertainty of the supply 9.2 The lower tier / Customer order becomes unpredictable 9.3 The lead time to respond to the market demand increases 9.4 The supply and demand synchronization becomes difficult 9.5 Occurrence of stock-outs and/or backorder

3.5.2 Data Coding There are two types of scales of measurement used in this survey, namely nominal scale and ordinal scale. In nominal scales, numbers may be substituted for the names of the various classes of variable. The numbers serve only to identify the classes and do not indicate anything else. Thus, for example, in (Q 3), Below 50 employees are marked as (1) and Above 50 employees are marked as (2). Questions 6, 7 and 9, use Likert scale.

23

A Likert scale is a type of ordinal scale. The numbers used in identifying the observations are called ranks. Ranks tell about the degree of the variable within the set of observations at hand. These numbers are discussed in more detail in the below mentioned code book. This coding allows identification of variables for statistical analysis.

3.5.3 Coding Data for Analysis Before the statistical tests are performed, the data gathered from the survey should be converted to a proper form, so that the data can be analyzed. A code book as shown in Table 3.1, gives information about each variable. In this example, every variable can be coded and converted to a proper form that allow analysis. After coding the survey, the data is ready to be analyzed for the relationships between variables.

24

Table 3.1 Data Coding Variable Name (Q1) Primary sector of the player Codes 1 = Supplier 2 = Distributor 3 = Wholesaler 4 = Retailer 5 = Consultant 1 = Below 50 2 = Above 50 1= Below 500,000 Rupees 2 = Above 500,000 Rupees. 1 = B2B 2 = B2C 1 = Don't use 2 = Rare usage 3 = Average usage 4 = Good 5 = Excellent 1 = Don't use 2 = Rare usage 3 = Average usage 4 = Good 5 = Excellent

(Q3) Number of employees (Q4) Yearly revenue (Q5) Type of business

(Q 6.1) Extent of IT usage in checking vendor's performance history to supply the demanded merchandise (Q6.2) Extent of IT usage in checking the finished good invento0ry level

(Q6.3) Extent of IT usage in 1 = Don't use generating demand and sales 2 = Rare usage forecast 3 = Average usage 4 = Good 5 = Excellent (Q6.4) Extent of IT usage to access the database having the information about the inventory availability, price and order status etc. (Q6.5) Extent of IT usage in synchronizing with the players of Supply chain in terms of infrastructure for the information exchange 1 = Don't use 2 = Rare usage 3 = Average usage 4 = Good 5 = Excellent 1 = Don't use 2 = Rare usage 3 = Average usage 4 = Good 5 = Excellent

25

Table 3.1 continued (Q7.1) Extent of usage of 1 = Not applicable Electronic Cash Registers for 2 = Don't use Elec0tronic point of sale (EPoS) 3 = Average 4 = Good 5 = Excellent (Q7.2) Extent of usage of Radio 1 = Not applicable Frequency Identification device 2 = Don't use 3 = Average (RFID) 4 = Good 5 = Excellent (Q7.3) Extent of usage of 1 = Not applicable Electronic Data Interchange 2 = Don't use 3 = Average (EDI) 4 = Good 5 = Excellent (Q7.4) Extent of usage of Quick 1 = Not applicable 2 = Don't use Response Delivery System 3 = Average (QRDS) 4 = Good 5 = Excellent (Q7.5) Extent of usage of 1 = Not applicable Decision Support System (DSS) 2 = Don't use 3 = Average 4 = Good 5 = Excellent (Q 8) Inventory model used 1=Centralized Inventory control model (CICM) 2=Decentralized Inventory control model (DICM) (Q 9.1) The lower tier / customer 1 = Always o0ver-order, to buffer the stock, 2 = Frequently to hedge against uncertainty of 3 = Occasionally 4 = Rarely the supply 5 = Never (Q 9.2) The lower tier / customer 1 = Always order becomes unpredictable 2 = Frequently 3 = Occasionally 4 = Rarely 5 = Never (Q 9.3) The lead time to respond 1 = Always to the market demand increases 2 = Frequently 3 = Occasionally 4 = Rarely 5 = Never

26

Table 3.1 continued 1 = Always (Q 9.4) The supply and demand 2 = Frequently synchronization becomes 3 = Occasionally difficult 4 = Rarely 5 = Never (Q 9.5) Occurrence of stock-outs 1 = Always and/or backorder 2 = Frequently 3 = Occasionally 4 = Rarely 5 = Never

3.6 Data response Figures 3.1 and Figure 3.2 gives the distribution of the questionnaire respondents (participating players) and Distribution of the participants as per the Size and ICM used, respectively

27

Participating Players
R

15%

0%

16%

S
W
D

14%

23%

r
s
d

15%

3%

14%

C
c

R = Big Retailers S = Big Suppliers W = Big Wholesalers D =Big distributors C = Big consultants

r = Small retailers s = Small suppliers w = Small wholesalers d = Small distributors c = Small consultants

Figure 3.1 Distribution of Participating Players

28

Size and ICM used 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Number CICM DICM 50 30 20 41 19 22 Small Large

Figure 3.2 Distribution of the participants as per the Size and ICM used

29

CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS

After knowing the Experimental Design and Research Methodology, the following chapter deals with the Data Analysis to test hypotheses. In this chapter, the Experimental Objective is presented in the form of Research Questions. Following it, is discussion of probable factors for the cause. Hypotheses are framed to meet the Experimental Objectives and Statistical Tests are administered to determine experimental results.

4.1 Research Questions The following questions are focus points: 1. Why is the Retail business in India inefficient (India has only 2% organized retail business) 2. What is the level of IT implementation to Small and Large players of the Retail Supply Chain in India? 3. Is there any significant difference between the level of IT implementation to the firms and their Demand and Supply efficiency (DSE)? 4. Is there any significant difference between the Inventory Control Model (ICM) used and DSE of the firms? 5. Are the firms implementing Centralized Inventory Control Model (CICM) more efficient in terms of DSE as compared to the firms implementing Decentralized Inventory Control Model (DICM)?

30

6.

What should be the strategy (corresponding change in the supply chain architecture) to make the IT implementation more effective?

7.

Where in the supply chain should IT be implemented?

4.2 Discussion of probable factors for the cause Poor supply and demand management is usually one of the biggest reasons for retail business inefficiency. Poor demand visibility and agility lead to demand distortion. Second guessing in DICM, which is most prominently used in retail business in India, leads to bullwhip effect. This leads to stock-outs / backorders. To compensate, the price of merchandise is hiked up and the end customer happens to be at loss. As a result of this, the overall retail efficiency becomes poor. Information Technology implementation can increase the demand agility. Demand recording, transferring and forecasting tools can help reduce demand distortion. CICM can help reduce the demand distortion due to bullwhip effect.

4.3 Hypotheses Accessing the level of IT implementation to the Small and Large firms in India: [1 a] Null Hypothesis: Overall level of Information Technology implementation to Large firms in India is below average. Alternate Hypothesis: Overall level of Information Technology implementation to Large firms in India is above average. H0 : L 3 H1 : L > 3

L = Overall IT implementation to the Large firms


31

Reference: Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 2 / Question # 6.1 6.5 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 2 / Question # 7.1 7.5

[1 b] Null Hypothesis: Overall level of Information Technology implementation to Small firms in India is above average. Alternate Hypothesis: Overall level of Information Technology implementation to Small firms in India is below average. H 0 : S 3 H1 : S < 3

S = Overall IT implementation to the Small firms


Reference: Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 2 / Question # 6.1 6.5 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 3 / Question # 7.1 7.5 For everyone other than retailers, the cash register is useless. Similarly RFID for small retailers is not needed. Hence they are not taken into consideration for analysis. All other points are given equal weight and hence multiplying the response by the weight of the corresponding question is suggested in the future research. Since the mean of the sample is to be compared with a number, Students t-test is used for the analysis (Results is attached in the Appendix as Hypothesis 1a and 1b). ANOVA is not used here, because knowing the significant relation between the levels of IT implementation and Small and Large is not required. The Level of IT implementation is to be seen. The reference to compare mean is decided as 3 because in the scale of 1-5, 3 is considered as the median. Checking on the decided significance level = 0.05, the results are confirmed. They are mentioned in the following Table 4.1. 32

Table 4.1 Hypothesis 1a and 1b S No 1a Hypotheses H0 : L 3 H1 : L > 3 1b H 0 : S 3 H1 : S < 3 <0.0001 Value of P <0.0001 Conclusion Large firms have above average level of Information Technology implementation Small firms have below average level of Information Technology implementation

The result was expected, because the large companies are normally well adapted to the technology as compared to the small companies. Small firms in India have poor level of IT implementation. However, the result confirms the case for the further support. Even though the IT implementation by the large firms is above average but still, the overall retail business efficiency in India is only 2 %. It will be useful to check the significant relationship between the level of Demand and Supply efficiency, with respect to the level of IT implementation (Small and Large firms).

Hypothesis 2 [2a] Null hypothesis: There is no significant difference between the DSE and size of the firms. Alternate hypothesis: There is a significant difference between the DSE and size of the firms. H 0 : L = S H1 : L S

L = Demand and Supply efficiency of Large firms

33

S = Demand and supply efficiency of Small firms


Reference: Hypothesis 1 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 5 / Question # 9.1 9.5 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA): Significance between the Demand and Supply

efficiency and the Size (level of IT implementation) of the firms is checked by ANOVA. Base SAS is used to carry out ANOVA. ANOVA table breaks down the observed variation in the response into variation between and within classification groups, respectively. The ratio of these two sources of variation is called the F statistic. Large values indicate that the variation between classification groups is much larger than the variation within classification groups. However, decision is made with the p statistics. Student-Newman-Keuls (SNK): SNK test is done to confirm the results of the ANOVA. This test controls the Type I experiment wise error rate under the complete null hypothesis. The ANOVA and SNK output is shown below in Table 4.2. The SAS program is attached in the Appendix C.

Table 4.2 Hypothesis 2a S No 2a Hypothesis H 0 : L = S H1 : L S P Conclusion

0.0635 There is no significant difference between DSE and Size (level of IT implementation) of the firms

34

Surprisingly, even though large companies are better IT implemented and IT implementation to small firms is below average, there is no significant difference in the DSE between small and large firms. Level of IT implementation to the small firms is below average. Hence the demand and supply efficiency for the small firms is not systematic and is not agile. As the demand from the small tiers reaches the upper stages, it gets more and more distorted due to the second guessing by the intermediate players. By the time it reaches the supplier, considerable distortion happens in the demand. As a result of this, the supplier cannot make the correct prediction about his production cycle and volume. Stock outs and back orders which happen due to this reason make the overall demand and supply efficiency poor. Hence the poor efficiency of the small firms plagues the whole supply chain efficiency.

Hypothesis 2 b Inventory control model can also have an effect on demand and supply efficiency. This is because the ordering policy might affect the demand distortion, considering the intermediate players second guessing into account. In the following section, we analyze if there is any significance between demand and supply efficiency and inventory control model used by the firms. 2 b] Null hypothesis: There is no significant difference between the demand and supply efficiency and ICM used by the firms. Alternate hypothesis: There is a significant difference between the demand and supply efficiency and ICM used by the firms.

35

H 0 : CICM = DICM H 1 : CICM DICM

CICM = Demand and Supply efficiency of firms implementing CICM DICM = Demand and Supply efficiency of firms implementing DICM
Reference: Hypothesis 1 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 4 / Question # 8 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 5 / Question # 9.1 9.5 The following Table 4.3 shows that, there is a significant difference in the DSE between the firms using CICM and DICM. Table 4.3 Hypothesis 2b S no 2b H 0 : CICM = DICM H 1 : CICM DICM 0.0001 There is a significant difference in the DSE between the firms using CICM and DICM. Hypothesis P Conclusion

Student-Newman-Keuls-Test : The ANOVA results are confirmed by the SNK test since the difference in the Mean of Large and Small is greater than the Critical Range

Now, since we know that there is a significant difference between the demand and supply efficiency, considering the ICM used, it will be interesting to see which ICM has better Demand and Supply efficiency. Hence, hypothesis 3 uses two sampled t-test to compare the means of the demand and supply efficiency of firms using CICM and firms using DICM.

36

Hypothesis 3 Null hypothesis: Demand and supply efficiency of the firms implementing CICM is less than those implementing DICM. Alternate hypothesis: Demand and supply efficiency of the firms implementing CICM is better than those implementing DICM. H 0 : CICM DICM 0 H 1 : CICM DICM > 0

CICM = Demand and Supply efficiency of firms implementing CICM DICM = Demand and Supply efficiency of firms implementing DICM
Reference: Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 4 / Question # 8 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 5 / Question # 9.1 9.5 The following Table 4.4 shows that the demand and supply efficiency of CICM is better than DICM. Table 4.4 Hypothesis 3 S No 3 Hypothesis P Conclusion

H 0 : CICM DICM 0 0.0001 The demand and supply efficiency of H 1 : CICM DICM > 0 CICM is better than DICM.

Thus it is seen that the firms implementing CICM have better DSE as compared to the firms implementing DICM. In the following hypothesis (4a), it is seen whether the DSE of Large companies is significant with respect to the inventory model used. Hypothesis (4b) similarly attempts to see the case with respect to Small firms.

37

Hypothesis 4a 4a] Null hypothesis: There is no significant difference between the demand and supply efficiency and ICM used by Large firms. Alternate hypothesis: There is a significant difference between the demand and supply efficiency and ICM used by Large firms. H 0 : CICM L = DICM L H 1 : CICM L DICM L

CICM L = Demand and Supply efficiency of Large firms implementing CICM DICM L = Demand and Supply efficiency of Large firms implementing DICM
The following Table 4.5 shows that there is a significant difference in the DSE between the large firms using CICM and DICM.

Table 4.5 Hypothesis 4a S. No 4a H 0 : CICM L = DICM L H1 : CICM L DICM L 0.0015 There is a significant difference in the DSE between the large firms using CICM and DICM. Hypothesis P Conclusion

Student-Newman-Keuls-Test : The ANOVA results are confirmed by the SNK test since the difference in the Mean of Large and Small is less than the Critical Range

Reference: Hypothesis 1 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 1 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 4 / Question # 8 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 5 / Question # 9.1 9.5

38

4 b] Null hypothesis: There is no significant difference between demand and supply efficiency and ICM used by Small firms. Alternate hypothesis: There is a significant difference between the demand and supply efficiency and ICM used by Small firms. H0: CICMS = DICMS H 1: CICMS DICMS

CICM S = Demand and Supply efficiency of Small firms implementing CICM DICM S = Demand and Supply efficiency of Small firms implementing DICM
Reference: Hypothesis 1 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 1 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 4 / Question # 8 Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 5 / Question # 9.1 9.5 The following Table 4.6 shows that there is a significant difference in the DSE between the small firms using CICM and DICM.

Table 4.6 Hypothesis 4b S No 4b Hypothesis P 0.0435 Conclusion There is a significant difference in the DSE between the small firms using CICM and DICM.

CICMS = DICMS CICMS DICMS

Student-Newman-Keuls-Test : The ANOVA results are confirmed by the SNK test since the difference in the Mean of Large and Small is greater than the Critical Range

4.4 Conclusions 39

1) From hypothesis 1, it is seen that Large firms in India have above average level of IT implementation and Small firms have below average. 2) However, hypothesis 2a tells that the DSE of the Large and Small firms, which have above and below level of IT implementation respectively, does not differ significantly. 3) As seen in hypothesis 2b, 4a and 4b, DSE difference occurs when the comparison is done between the firms implementing CICM and firms implementing DICM as shown in the Table 4.7 below.

Table 4.7 DSE relationship between the firms implementing CICM and DICM Hypothesis 2a 2b 4a 4b Comparison of Demand and Supply efficiency with regards to Size (Small / Large) ICM (CICM / DICM) ICM (CICM / DICM) Large firms ICM (CICM / DICM) Small firms Value of F 3.46 16.37 10.39 4.12 Value of P 0.0635 0.0001 0.0015 0.0435

4) From the hypothesis 3, it is proved that the firms implementing the CICM have better DSE as compared to the firms implementing DICM.

4.5 Implications CICMs DSE is observed to be better than DICMs DSE. This trend is consistently observed when the comparison is between the Small firms, between Large firms and between all the firms, irrespective of size (level of IT implementation). In DICM, each player makes its own demand estimate based on the lower tiers demand. The decisions made by players in the supply chain are logical, taken into

40

account the information available to them. The problem is that available information is distorted. This distortion is added up into each tier. Demand forecast updating, price fluctuation and shortage gaming are the prime reasons for the second guessing and distortion. Demand forecast updating is caused by the overreaction of the next tier in the supply chain to changes in the demand estimates by the preceding tier. When there are several cyclic customers, ordering in batches, in addition to different inventory control policies, the demand is amplified towards the upstream of the supply chain. Price fluctuation inflicted by the up-stream tiers of the supply chain is one more reason for demand distortion. When the products are offered at a cheaper price than normal, the down-stream tiers tend to fill their inventories. In other words they deliberately order more than what their own view of the end demand would suggest. When the supply is limited and lead times increase, the down-stream tiers try to increase their inventory to cover the increase in lead times. This is done by ordering more, including ordering from new suppliers. The suppliers have a tendency to divide the scarcity between the customers, trying to keep everybody reasonably happy. On the other hand, when the demand in a down-stream tier is fulfilled and the target inventories reached, the rest of the orders are cancelled. This kind of interaction gives an unrealistic picture of the demand to the upstream tiers. Hence to improve the retail business in India, the level of IT implementation to the small firms will have to be improved. Implementing IT to the small firms will improve their demand agility but the DICM will still plague the supply chain, with second guessing which will contribute to the bullwhip effect.

41

Thus, to improve the Retail Business efficiency, along with the IT implementation, the supply chain architecture should be framed using the Centralized inventory control model.

CHAPTER 5 RECOMMENDATIONS

42

The one-on-one architecture to implement the centralized model might be very chaotic. Hence this chapter suggests the design of a Centralized Model for the whole system. It gives the system architecture and the IT to be used. This design cannot be trusted as fool proof. However, it can be one of the ideas for future research. Building simulation models to test the design of recommended supply chain architecture considering the demand and supply management efficiency improvement and cost benefit analysis is suggested in the future research. It would be a good idea to study the current Indian Retail Supply chain so that the suggested recommendations could be seen clearly. Figure 5.1 gives a snapshot of the same.

5.1 The Indian Supply chain architecture

43

The large Suppliers (S1, S2, Sn) supply the merchandise to the retail chain through their individual large Distributors (D11, D12, D1n / D21, D22, D2n / Dn1, Dn2, Dnn)

S1 S2

Sn s1 s2 sn

D21

D22

D2n

D21

D22

D2n

D11

D12

D1n

W1

W2 Wn

R1

R2

Rn

w1

w2 wn

r1

r2

rn

S / s = Large / Small Suppliers R/ r = Large and Small Retailers

D = Large Distributors W / w = Large and Small wholesalers

Figure 5.1 Snapshot of Indian Retail Supply Chain

who distribute the merchandise to the large Wholesalers (W1, W2, Wn). The Small Suppliers (s1, s2, sn) get the contracts from the wholesalers or a subcontract from the big Suppliers. The merchandise is further supplied to Big Retailers (R1, R2, Rn) and also to the small wholesalers (w1, w2, wn). Small wholesalers supply the merchandise to the small retailers (r1, r2, rn). Stock outs and backorders happen due to the poor demand visibility, primarily due to the poor IT implementation in the small firms. Due to the poor forecasting methods and ad-hoc demand policy of the small retailers, the bullwhip effect goes from r 44

w W D S and during this it amplifies. There are 12 million small enterprises in India and hence this happens to be a considerable cause for poor retail efficiency. Due to the poor ability to choose the best supplier from the pool of suppliers, the procurement of merchandise happens to be a compromise in terms of the most reasonable quality and cost (Chapter 3.5.1 / Section 2 / Q 6.4). Unfortunately some of the competitive suppliers do not get a chance to introduce their product due to poor marketing channels. The order cycles from the lower tiers and hence the production schedules for the suppliers become discontinuous, since the supplier is often switched for a supplier giving a better deal. Hence lead time increases and the cost from the supplier fluctuates. This causes cyclic inefficiency.

5.2 Proposed model for supply chain To improve the visibility of the lower tier, the CICM should be aimed by the whole system. The framework should be as shown in Figure 5.2.

45

S1

S2

Sn

s1

s2

sn Retail link

Central Wholesaler

Decision Support System

R1

R2

Rn

r1

r2

rn

S / s = Large and Small Suppliers Figure 5.2 Proposed knowledge supply chain R / r = Large and Small Retailers

Wholesalers should cluster together and form the Central Wholesaler. Central wholesaler should be responsible for Purchasing and Distribution services. He should have the access to the merchandise information (price and quality) offered by all the suppliers taking part in the system. On the other hand, he should also have the information about the demand from the lower tiers. Thus, there should be a knowledge base which can be shared by Suppliers, Central body as well as the Retailers. Central Wholesaler should also form a Retail Link with the retailers. Retailers should be using Electronic Cash Registers. This can be used for Electronic Point of Sale (EPoS) accounting as well as inventory tracking. Depending upon the model, the cash registers can also be used to electronically generate the demand

46

and sales forecast.

Electronic data interchange (EDI) should be networked for

transferring the data to the Central Wholesaler. This will make the demand more visible and agile. Quick Response and delivery system (QRDS) will also get a scope to work effectively for quick (point of sale) replenishment. The flow of the information from the retailers can be read by the Central Wholesaler. The Decision Support System (DSS) can be used to optimize the supply information so that the business data is presented to make demand and supply decisions more easily. This Retail Link system will enable the retailers to share information with suppliers (through Central Wholesaler) on a real-time basis. This will enable the suppliers to check the demand regularly. This system will also enable the Central Wholesaler to monitor the cost offered by individual suppliers. In this way, since the supplier offering the best deal will be in contract, his production cycle will be smooth. This in turn will reduce the lead time and the cost due to avoidance of the stock outs and back order. Effects of the Retail Link will be directly visible in managing the bullwhip effect, as well as increasing the competition amongst the suppliers. This improvement in efficiency will cut stock-outs and backorder costs, both for wholesalers as well as the suppliers. Everyone including the inventory managers, sales people, and suppliers will be able to look at the same data, at the same time. Thus, changing market trends

observation, vendor relation activities, pricing, warehousing & distribution activities can be handled from one central place only. This business model will demand EDI network to access the knowledge base as well as to give demand input to the knowledge base. High level computerized

47

environment to handle the common Stock keep Units (SKU) management & stock details, location wise and consolidated stock position will be essential to be known so as to avoid duplicate stocks & stock outs. Category management & price point analysis will also be very critical to enhance productivity of the business. The participants taking part in the system should be getting the merchandise at the lower price. Non-participating players will be the reasons for the major bullwhip effect. They can be allowed to follow the different chain. This definitely involves cost and infrastructure. But as per the International Data Corporation, with the ongoing investment in bandwidth, the development of shared Internet facilities and the explosion in dot-com start, a large base of users and shoppers are expected to look forward to Information technology.

5.3 Logistics Supply Chain As mentioned, vendor relation activities, pricing & distribution activities can be handled by the Central Wholesaler. Merchandise thus ordered from the suppliers should then be cross docked to the individual big Warehouses (Wh) and small warehouse (wh) depending upon the market size. The warehouse should just be a cross docking station until the merchandise reach further to the retailer. Figure 5.3 shows the proposed logistic supply chain:

48

Wc

Wh1

Whn

wh1

whn

R11 R12 R1n

r11 r12 r1n

Rr1 Rr2 Rnn Wc = Central Wholesaler Wh = Large Warehouse (Cross docking station) wh = Small Warehouse (Cross docking station) R / r = Large / Small Retailers Figure 5.3 Proposed Logistics Supply Chain

rn1 rn2 rnn

5.4 Economies of Scale This system will follow economies of sale since huge purchasing decisions will be done by the central wholesaler. The negative working capital can be negotiated to further add to the bargaining power, the way Wal-Mart does with its sheer volume. Retail Link will allow slowly raise margins and stilling under-price the competition, for the suppliers. Lower prices will drive gains in market share and sales. Higher sales will in turn translate into more margin gain, which in turn will give more capital to invest in further cost reduction. Thus the idea of improving the lower supply chain visibility with the suggested IT tools and implementing CICM with the suggested architecture for the flow of information

49

and merchandise, should be the a step ahead for consideration in making the retail business chain in India efficient.

5.5 Future Research In the qualitative analysis, the weight for all questions is considered to be equal. However for the detailed analysis, the weight should be given to the questions as per the importance and the scores / responses should be multiplied with it. The design of suggested model for implementing the CICM cannot be considered as a fool proof. However, simulation models can be developed to test the idea. Economic model and break even point should be studied for the further consideration.

5.6 Closing Only 2% of the companies in India have an organized supply chain. Until now, retailing had not been considered as an industry, and there were only traders associations at the local levels. Recently the Government of India has opened the economy and allowed Foreign Direct investments (FDI). A number of international retail players will soon be launching their businesses in India. The traditional Indian retailers must continue to refine their overall business vision so as to hold their ground against this Multi National Company (MNC) onslaught. This will no doubt need calculated risk such as investing on the Information Technology which can be one of the big tools to lessen the demand and supply chaos.

50

Recently, the Retailers Association of India (RAI) is formed in September 2004, under the auspices of the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII). This Council is expected to serve as a lobby group for the industry, for the Government, to improve the overall retail business. It is a step which will redefine the retail industry in India. This thesis is an idea forward considering the RAI project for improving the overall retail business in India.

51

REFERENCES 1. A Gunasekaran, C Patel, E Tirtiroglu (2001). Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Volume 21, Number 1, Page 71 87. 2. Alan G Hallsworth, Steve Worthington (2000). Local resistance to larger retailers: the example of market towns and the food superstore. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Volume 28, Number 4, Page 207 216. 3. Alan C McKinnon (1992). Retail Supply Chain Electronic Data Interchange: The Distribution Contractor's Role. Logistics Information Management, Volume 5, Number 2, Page 165 172. 4. Arthur Meidan, Anne Tomes (1993). "Cash And Carry Customers. Shopping Habits and Supplier choice criteria. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Volume 19, Number 5, Page 122 126. 5. Angela da Rocha, Luis Antonio Dib (2002). The entry of Wal-Mart in Brazil and the competitive responses of multinational and domestic firms. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Volume 30, Number:1, Page 61 73. 6. Astad Pastakia (1998). "Grassroots ecopreneurs: change agents for a sustainable society. Journal of Organizational Change Management, Volume 11, Number 2 Page: 157 173. 7. B Andries, L Gelders (1995). "Time-based manufacturing logistics. Logistics Information Management, Volume 8, Number 3, Page 30 36. 8. Benita M Beamon (1999). Measuring supply chain performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Volume 19, Number 3, Page 275 292. 9. Beverly K Brockman, Robert M Morgan (1999). "The evolution of managerial innovations in distribution: what prospects for ECR?. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Volume 27, Number 10, Page: 397 408. 10. Biren Prasad (1995). "JIT quality matrices for strategic planning and implementation. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Volume 15, Number 9, Page 116 141. 11. CII Mckinsey (2004). Indian Retail Environment. Page 21- 42.

52

12. C Anthony Di Benedetto, Roger J Calantone, Chun Zhang (2003). International technology transfer: Model and exploratory study in the People's Republic of China. International Marketing Review, Volume 20, Number 4, Page 446 462. 13. Carlos Melo Brito (2001). "Towards an institutional theory of the dynamics of industrial networks. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Volume 16, Number 3, Page 150 166. 14. Charles X Wang (2002). A general framework of supply chain contract models. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Volume: 7 Number: 5 Page: 302 -- 310 15. Christopher Rau (2003). "Are you getting value from your IT?. Journal of Business Strategy, Volume: 24 Number: 3 Page: 16 -- 20 16. Cliff Guy (2001). Internationalization of large-format retailers and leisure providers in western Europe: planning and property impacts. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Volume: 29 Number: 10 Page: 452 -- 461 17. David Bennett, Paul Forrester, John Hassard (1992). "Market-driven Strategies and the Design of Flexible Production Systems: Evidence from the Electronics Industry. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Volume: 12 Number: 2 Page Page: 8 -- 11 18. Donald Skilling (1996). "Beyond the quick fix: how to manage more effectively in the heart of change. Industrial and Commercial Training, Volume: 28 Number: 4 Page: 3 -- 7 19. Everard Tarascio (1997). "Business critical messaging. Journal: Information Management & Computer Security, Volume: 5 Number: 4 Page: 149 -- 152. 20. Ewen Kinnear (1997). "Is there any magic in cross-docking?. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Volume: 2 Number: 2 Page: 49 -- 52 21. Goran Svensson (2003). "The bullwhip effect in intra-organizational echelon. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Volume: 33 Number: 2 Page: 103 -- 131 22. Herbert Kotzab (1999). Improving supply chain performance by efficient consumer response? A critical comparison of existing ECR approaches. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Volume: 14 Number: 5 Page: 364 -- 377 23. Jan C Fransoo, Marc J.F. Wouters (2000). Measuring the bullwhip effect in the supply chain. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Volume: 5 Number: 2 Page: 78 -- 89

53

24. Jan Olhager, Erik Selldin (2003). Enterprise resource planning survey of Swedish manufacturing firms. European Journal of Operational Research, Volume: 4 Number 4 Page 365373 25. Jan Holmstrm, Ari-Pekka Hameri (1999). "The dynamics of consumer response A quest for the attractors of supply chain demand. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Volume: 19 Number: 10 Page: 993 -- 1010 26. Joshua Bamfield (1994). Technological Management Learning: The Adoption of Electronic Data Interchange by Retailers. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Volume: 22 Number: 2 Page: 3 -- 11 27. J.A.N. Bamfield (1994). Implementing EDI: Problems in Managing Retail / Supplier Relationships by Technology. Logistics Information Management. Volume: 7 Number: 1 Page: 7 -- 10 28. Julia Hanna (2004), Ground-Floor Opportunities for Retail in India. Harvard Business Review from http://hbswk.hbs.edu/pubitem.jhtml?id=4072&t=special_reports_india2004 29. Leo R Vijayasarathy, Michael L Tyler (1997). Adoption factors and electronic data interchange use: a survey of retail companies. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Volume: 25 Number: 9 Page: 286 -- 292 30. Leigh Sparks, Beverly A Wagner (2003). "Retail exchanges: a research agenda. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Volume: 8 Number: 3 Page: 201 -- 208 31. Marco Iansiti and Roy Levien (2004). Strategy for Small Fish. Harvard Business Review from http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item.jhtml?id=4331&t=innovation 32. Mariano Corso, Antonella Martini, Emilio Paolucci, Luisa Pellegrini (2003). "Knowledge management configurations in Italian small-to-medium enterprises. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Volume: 14 Number: 1 Page: 46 52 33. Mark Peterson, Jeffrey E McGee (2000). Survivors of "W-day": an assessment of the impact of Wal-Mart's invasion of small town retailing communities. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Volume: 28 Number: 4 Page: 170 -- 180 34. Majed Al-Mashari, Abdullah Al-Mudimigh, Mohamed Zairi (2002). Enterprise resource planning: A taxonomy of critical factors. European Journal of Operational Research, Volume: 12 Number: 3 Page 242--253. 35. Melih Kirlidog (1996). Information technology transfer to a developing country. Information Technology & People, Volume: 9 Number: 3 Page: 55 -- 84 54

36. Michael J Gallivan, Jim Eynon, Arun Rai (2003). The challenge of knowledge management systems: Analyzing the dynamic processes underlying performance improvement initiatives. Information Technology & People, Volume: 16 Number: 3 Page: 326 -- 352 37. Michael S Spencer, Dale S Rogers, Patricia J Daugherty (1994). "JIT Systems and External Logistics Suppliers. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Volume: 14 Number: 6 Page: 60 -- 74. 38. Marilyn M Helms, Lawrence P Ettkin, Sharon Chapman (2000). "Supply chain forecasting - Collaborative forecasting supports supply chain management. Business Process Management Journal, Volume: 6 Number: 5 Page: 392 407 39. Navdeep Aggarwal, Raghbir Singh (2004). "Market orientation in Indian organizations: an empirical study. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Volume: 22 Number: 7 Page: 700 -- 715 40. Neelam Kinra (1995). "Strategic dimensions in marketing planning: large versus small/medium companies in the Indian television market. Marketing Intelligence & Planning Journal, Volume: 13 Number: 4 Page: 34 -- 44 41. Nynke Faber, Rene Marinus, B.M. de Koster, Steef L van de Velde (2002). "Linking warehouse complexity to warehouse planning and control structure: An exploratory study of the use of warehouse management information systems. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Volume: 32 Number: 5 Page: 381 -- 395 42. Peter Gilmour (1999). A strategic audit framework to improve supply chain performance. The Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Volume: 14 Number: 5 Page: 355 -- 366 43. Philip R.S. Wilson, Steve J Fathers (1989).Distribution - The Contract Approach. International Journal of physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Volume: 19 Number: 6 44. Piyush Kumar Sinha, Arindam Banerjee (2004). "Store choice behaviour in an evolving market. International Journal of Retail & Distribution, Volume: 32 Number: 10 Page: 482 494 45. Reed Moyer (1991). "A bargain theory of pricing. European Journal of Marketing, Volume: 5 Number: 4 Page: 161 -- 167. 46. Remko I van Hoek, Alan Harrison, Martin Christopher (2001). Measuring agile capabilities in the supply chain. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Volume: 21 Number: 1 Page: 126 -- 148

55

47. Richard P Vlosky, Paul M Smith, David T Wilson (1994). Electronic Data Interchange Implementation Strategies: A Case Study. The Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Volume: 9 Number: 4 Page: 5 -- 18 48. Ritu Lohtia, Ramesh Subramaniam (2000). Structural transformation of the Japanese retail distribution system. The Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Volume: 15 Number: 5 Page: 323 -- 339 49. Sarah Jane Johnston (2004). What Drives Supply Chain Behavior? Harvard Business Review from http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item.jhtml?id=4170&t=operations 50. S.M. Disney, D.R. Towill (2003). "Vendor-managed inventory and bullwhip reduction in a two-level supply chain. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Volume: 23 Number: 6 Page: 625 -- 651 51. Samuel W Jimba (1999). Information technology and underdevelopment in the Third World. Library Review, Volume: 48 Number: 2 Page: 79 -- 83 52. Sanjay K Bhattacharyya, Zillur Rahman (2003). "Why large local conglomerates may not work in emerging markets. European Business Review, Volume: 15 Number: 2 Page: 105 -- 115 53. Sharon M Davidson, Amy Rummel (2000). Retail changes associated with WalMart's entry into Maine. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Volume: 28 Number: 4 Page: 162 -- 169 54. Siriginidi Subba Rao (2000). "E-commerce: the medium is the mart. New Library World, Volume: 101 Number: 2 Page: 53 -- 59 55. Stephen J Arnold, John Fernie (2000). Wal-Mart in Europe: prospects for the UK. International Marketing Review, Volume: 17 Number: 4 Page: 416 -- 432 56. Susan A Shaw, Donald J Nisbet, John A Dawson (2001). "Economies of Scale in UK Supermarkets: Some Preliminary Findings. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Volume: 15 Number: 3 Page 272280 57. Steve V Walton, Jatinder N.D. Gupta.(1999). Electronic data interchange for process change in an integrated supply chain. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Volume: 19 Number: 4 Page: 372 -- 388 58. Tim McLaren, Milena Head, Yufei Yuan (2002). "Supply chain collaboration alternatives: understanding the expected costs and benefits. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, Volume: 12 Number: 4 Page: 348 -364

56

59. Toni M. Somers a, Klara G. Nelson b (2003). The impact of strategy and integration mechanisms on enterprise system value. European Journal of Operational Research, Volume 5 Number 4 Page 211 219 60. Zhenxin Yu, Hong Yan, T.C. Edwin Cheng (2001). "Benefits of information sharing with supply chain partnerships. Industrial Management & Data Systems, Volume: 101 Number: 3 Page: 114 -- 121

57

APPENDIX A GLOSSARY

Retailer

An individual or corporation engaged in the business of selling merchandise to the general public.

Wholesaler

An individual, association or corporation engaged in the business of selling inventory to retailers.

Distributor

An agent or agency having exclusive or shared rights for the marketing and distribution of a product.

Supplier

An organization that provides goods and/or services to a purchasing organization.

Mom and Pop Store Supermarket

Small stores that is typically owned and run by members of a family. A large, self-service, retail market that sells food and household goods.

Hypermarket

Hypermarket is an extremely large self-service retail outlet with a warehouse appearance.

Business-toBusiness (B2B) Business-toConsumer (B2C)

B2B primarily focus towards other businesses, not consumers.

B2C primarily focus towards consumers not other businesses.

58

Barcode

Barcode is an encoded set of lines and spaces of different widths that can be scanned and interpreted into numbers.

Stock Keeping Unit (SKU) Electronic Cash Registers (EPoS)

An identification number assigned to a unique product category by the retailer. With this system a bar code on a product is scanned and the computer removes the scanned item from stock figures and thus is used to assist for accounting / inventory tracking and management.

Universal Product Code

The Universal Product Code is a standard for encoding a set of lines and spaces that can be scanned and interpreted into numbers to identify a product.

Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)

EDI enables retailers to integrate their purchasing / selling activities with their suppliers, with electronic information transfer.

Quick Response QRDS helps to commute the information for quick (point of sale) Delivery System (QRDS) Decision Support System (DSS) Radio Frequency Identification DSS is a computer program application that analyzes business data and presents it so that users can make business decisions more easily. RFID is a system, which converts the radio waves, reflected back from the RFID tag into digital information which can be used for efficient inventory management and improving supply chain replenishment.

59

Device (RFID) Perpetual Inventory

management. Perpetual Inventory is a method for tracking and knowing the value of inventory and quantity of merchandise on hand at any time by tracking sales, returns and receipts with information systems.

Centralized Inventory Control Model (CICM) Decentralized Inventory Control Model (DICM) Customer Relationship Management (CRM)

In Centralized inventory model, all stages base their forecast on the end customer demand data.

In decentralized inventory model, all stages base their forecast on the lower tier's data

CRM entails all aspects of interaction; a company has with its customer, whether it is sales or service related. Computerization has changed the way companies are approaching their CRM strategies because it has also changed consumer buying behavior.

Collaborative Planning, Forecasting and Replenishment

CPFR is designed to improve the flow of goods from the raw material suppliers, to the manufacturer, to the retailers shelves. It also is designed to quickly identify any discrepancies in the forecasts, inventory, and ordering data so that the problems can be corrected before they negatively impact sales or profits. Sales

60

history, sales projections and other important information is shared with business partners, and they in turn share their raw material availability, lead times and other important information. Then the information is integrated, synchronized, and used to eliminate excess inventory and improve in-stock positions making everyone in the supply chain more profitable.

61

APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE

1) Please indicate if you primarily are a: Supplier Distributor Wholesaler 2) What is your position? 3) How many employees work in your firm? Below 50 Above 50

Retailer

Consultant

4) What is the yearly revenue of your company? (In Rupees: 1USD = 45 Rupees) Below 500,000 Above 500,000 5) On what market does your company primarily work on? Business to Business (B2B)] Business to consumer (B2C)

6) In the following areas, please rate the extent of IT usage. Usage can be the overall capability of the implemented IT to network / interface with the players of the supply chain. 1 Don't use 2 Rare usage 3 Average usage 4 Good 5 Excellent 12345 6.1 Checking vendor's performance history to supply the demanded merchandise 6.2 Checking the finished good inventory level 6.3 Generating demand and sales forecast 6.4 Ability to access the database having the information about the inventory availability, price and order status etc 6.5 Synchronizing with the players of Supply chain in terms of infrastructure for the information exchange 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345

62

7) Please rate the degree and efficiency to which the company use the following to interface with the consumer/supply chain player 1 Not applicable 2 Don't use 3 Average 4 Good 5 Excellent 7.1 CASH REGISTORS - With this system, a bar code on a product is scanned and the computer removes the scanned item from stock figures (Used for Electronic point of sale - for accounting / inventory tracking and management) 7.2 RADIO FREQUENCY IDENTIFICATION DEVICE -RFID is a system, which converts the radio waves, reflected back from the RFID tag into digital information which can be used for efficient inventory management and improving supply chain management. 7.3 EDI - This enables retailers to integrate their purchasing / selling activities with their stores and/or with vendors. 7.4 QUICK RESPONSE DELIVERY SYSTEM - QRDS helps to commute the information for quick (point of sale) replenishment 7.5 DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM - DSS is a computer program application that analyzes business data and presents it so that users can make business decisions more easily 12345

12345

12345 12345 12345

8) Please indicate which Inventory model does your company primarily use (for the Retailer - the customers might be the lower tier) Centralized Inventory control model - In Centralized inventory model, all stages base their demand forecast on the end customer demand data Decentralized inventory control model - In decentralized inventory model, all stages base their demand forecast on the lower tier's data 9) Please rate the frequency of occurrence of the following phenomenon in the supply chain. 1 Always 2 Frequently 3 Occasionally 4 Rarely 5 Never 12345 9.1 The lower tier / Customer over-order, to buffer the stock, to hedge against uncertainty of the supply 9.2 The lower tier / Customer order becomes unpredictable 9.3 The lead time to respond to the market demand increases 9.4 The supply and demand synchronization becomes difficult 9.5 Occurrence of stock-outs and/or backorder 12345 12345 12345 12345

63

APPENDIX C SAS OUTPUT

Hypothesis 1a - One sample t-test SAS output One Sample t-test for a Mean Sample Statistics for Large firms N Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error ------------------------------------------------250 3.26 0.71 0.05 Hypothesis Test Null hypothesis: Mean of Large <= 3 Alternative: Mean of Large > 3 t Statistic Df Prob > t --------------------------------5.855 249 <.0001 Hypothesis 1b - One sample t-test SAS output One Sample t-test for a Mean Sample Statistics for Small firms N Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error ------------------------------------------------369 2.84 0.78 0.04 Hypothesis Test Null hypothesis: Mean of Small => 3 Alternative: Mean of Small < 3 t Statistic Df Prob > t ---------------------------------3.862 368 <.0001

64

Hypothesis 2a and 2b ANOVA / SNK The SAS System The ANOVA Procedure Class Level Information Class ICM SIZE Levels Values 2 12 2 12 455 455

Number of Observations Read Number of Observations Used ANOVA (ICM SIZE DSE) The SAS System The ANOVA Procedure Dependent Variable: DSE

Sum of Source DF Squares Mean Square F Value Pr > F Model 2 7.5423861 3.7711931 9.42 0.0001 Error 452 181.0378336 0.4005262 Corrected Total 454 188.5802198 Coeff Var Root MSE DSE Mean 19.91400 0.632871 3.178022 Source SIZE ICM DF 1 1 Anova SS Mean Square 1.38597588 1.38597588 6.15641026 6.15641026 F Value 3.46 15.37 Pr > F 0.0635 0.0001

65

SNK (ICM DSE) The SAS System The ANOVA Procedure Student-Newman-Keuls Test for DSE NOTE: This test controls the Type I experiment wise error rate under the complete null hypothesis but not under partial null hypotheses. Alpha 0.05 Error Degrees of Freedom 452 Error Mean Square 0.400526 Harmonic Mean of Cell Sizes 226.1538 NOTE: Cell sizes are not equal. Number of Means 2 Critical Range 0.116961 Means with the same letter are not significantly different. SNK Grouping Mean N ICM A 3.28571 245 1 B 3.05238 210 2 Mean A- Mean B = 3.28571 - 3.05238 = 0.2333 > critical range Hence there is a variation.

66

SNK (SIZE DSE) The SAS System The ANOVA Procedure Student-Newman-Keuls Test for DSE NOTE: This test controls the Type I experiment wise error rate under the complete null hypothesis but not under partial null hypotheses. . Alpha 0.05 Error Degrees of Freedom 452 Error Mean Square 0.400526 Harmonic Mean of Cell Sizes 225.2747 NOTE: Cell sizes are not equal. Number of Means 2 Critical Range 0.117189 Means with the same letter are not significantly different. SNK Grouping Mean N SIZE A 3.22800 250 2 B 3.11707 205 1 Mean A - Mean B = 3.22800 - 3.11707 = 0.11093 < critical range Hence there may not be variation.

67

Hypothesis 3 - Two sampled t-test Two Sample t-test for the Means of CICM__DSE_ and DICM__DSE_ Sample Statistics Group N Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error ------------------------------------------------------------------------CICM__DSE_ 245 3.285714 0.6714 0.0429 DICM__DSE_ 210 3.052381 0.5887 0.0406 Hypothesis Test Null hypothesis: Mean 1 - Mean 2 <= 0 Alternative: Mean 1 - Mean 2 > 0 If Variances Are t statistic Df Pr > t ---------------------------------------------------Equal 3.910 453 0.0001 Not Equal 3.950 452.76 0.0001

68

Hypothesis 4a ANOVA / SNK ICMLARGE - DSE The SAS System The ANOVA Procedure Class Level Information Class Levels Values ICMLARGE 2 12 LARGESIZE 1 1 Number of Observations Read Number of Observations Used 205 205 .

The SAS System The ANOVA Procedure Dependent Variable: DSEL Source DF Model 1 Error 203 Corrected Total204 Coeff Var Source ICMLARGE Sum of Squares 4.34239701 84.84784689 89.19024390 Root MSE Mean Square 4.34239701 0.41796969 F Value 10.39 Pr > F 0.0015

DSEL Mean

20.74079 0.646506 3.117073 DF Anova SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F 1 4.34239701 4.34239701 10.39 0.0015

69

The SAS System The ANOVA Procedure Student-Newman-Keuls Test for DSEL NOTE: This test controls the Type I experiment wise error rate under the complete null hypothesis but not under partial null hypotheses. Alpha 0.05 Error Degrees of Freedom 203 Error Mean Square 0.41797 Harmonic Mean of Cell Sizes 101.9512 NOTE: Cell sizes are not equal. Number of Means 2 Critical Range 0.1785403 Means with the same letter are not significantly different. SNK Grouping Mean N ICMLARGE A 3.27368 95 1 B 2.98182 110 2 Mean A- Mean B = 3.27368 - 2.98182 = 0.2 9186 > critical range Hence there is a variation.

70

Hypothesis 4b ANOVA SNK The SAS System The ANOVA Procedure Class Level Information Class ICMSMALL SMALLSIZE Levels 2 1 Values 12 2 250 250

Number of Observations Read Number of Observations Used

The SAS System The ANOVA Procedure Dependent Variable: DSES Source DF Model 1 Error 248 Corrected Total Sum of Squares Mean Square 1.60066667 1.60066667 96.40333333 0.38872312 249 98.00400000 Root MSE 0.623477 DSES Mean 3.228000 Mean Square F Value Pr > F 1.60066667 4.12 0.0435 F Value 4.12 Pr > F 0.0435

Coeff Var 19.31464 Source ICMSMALL

DF Anova SS 1 1.60066667

71

The SAS System The ANOVA Procedure Student-Newman-Keuls Test for DSES NOTE: This test controls the Type I experiment wise error rate under the complete null hypothesis but not under partial null hypotheses. Alpha 0.05 Error Degrees of Freedom 248 Error Mean Square 0.388723 Harmonic Mean of Cell Sizes 120 NOTE: Cell sizes are not equal. Number of Means 2 Critical Range 0.1585322 Means with the same letter are not significantly different. SNK Grouping Mean N ICMSMALL A 3.29333 150 1 B 3.13000 100 2 Mean A- Mean B = 3.29333 - 3.13000 = 0.16333 > critical range Hence there is a variation.

72

APPENDIX D RETAIL ACCOUNTING REPORTS

Purchase Order

Purchase order Checklist with Current Stock Daily Checklist Pending Order Listing Purchase Order Check

Quality Inspection

Daily Check List Excess/ Shortage List Daily Adjustment Listing

Goods Return

Daily Check List Department wise for the Day / Month / Year Supplier wise for the Day / Month / Year

Pricing & Labeling

Marked Price Markup % Mark Down %

Transfer of Goods

Daily Transfer - Out Listing Summary Daily Transfer - Out Listing Detail

73

Department-wise Transfer Out Daily Transfer - In Listing Summary Daily Transfer - In Listing Detail Department-wise Transfer In 6 Sales Order Daily Listing Daily Pending Daily advance received 7 Packing List Daily List Pending Packing Lists / Invoice Not Prepared 8 Sale of Goods Daily Check List Sales - Summary - For the Day / Month / Year Daily Listing - Summary (Deptwise) 9 Ageing Analysis Category - item wise Category - Brand wise Supplier - Brand wise.

74

APPENDIX E WAL-MART ECONOMIES OF SCALE

% Of its total sales to WalCompany Tandy Brands Accessories Clorox Revlon RJR Tobacco Procter & Gamble Mart 39% 23% 20% 20% 17%

Wal-Mart the biggest purchaser

Product Dog food Disposable diapers Photographic film Toothpaste Pain remedies

Wal-Marts US market share 36% 32% 30% 26% 21%

Wal-Mart the largest seller

http://www.walmartstores.com/Files/annualreport_2004.pdf

75

APPENDIX F ECONOMIC GROWTH OF INDIA

ECONOMIC GROWTH OF INDIA


8

6 PERCENT REAL GDP

0 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

http://www.pacom.mil/publications/apeu02/10India9.doc

76

APPENDIX G SAS PROGRAM

DATA SURVEYDATA; INPUT ICM SIZE DSE@@; CARDS; 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 4 2 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 3

77

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 4 4 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 5 2 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 3

78

1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3

79

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

3 3 3 3 3 4 2 3 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 2 4 3 2 3 3 2 4 3 3

80

1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

4 3 3 4 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 4 2 3 4 4 3 4 2 4 2 3 2 3 2 3 4 5 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 2

81

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 2 2 4 3 4 4 2 3 3 4 4 2 3 4 3 4 3 2 4

82

1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

4 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 2 3 2 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 2 4

83

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

3 4 2 3 3 2 3 4 4 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 4

84

1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 2 3 2 4 4 5 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3

85

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 4 3 4 4 2 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4

86

1 1 4 2 1 3 1 1 4 2 1 4 ; PROC ANOVA; CLASS ICM SIZE; MODEL DSE = SIZE ICM; MEANS ICM/SNK; MEANS SIZE/SNK; DATA ICMSMALLFIRMS; INPUT ICMSMALL SMALLSIZE DSES@@; CARDS; 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 4 2 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 3

87

1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 2 3 3 4 3 3

88

1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 4 2 3 4 4 3 4 2 4 2 3

89

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

2 3 2 3 4 5 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 2 3 2 4 4 4

90

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 2 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 2 4 3 4 2 3 3 2 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 2 3

91

1 2 2 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 5 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 4 2 2 3 2 2 4 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 3 ; PROC ANOVA; CLASS ICMSMALL SMALLSIZE; MODEL DSES = ICMSMALL; DATA ICMLARGEFIRMS; INPUT ICMLARGE LARGESIZE DSEL@@; CARDS; 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 1 1 2

92

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

3 2 3 3 3 4 4 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 5 2 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3

93

2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 2 4 3 2 3 3 2 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 2 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3

94

1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

3 4 2 2 4 3 4 4 2 3 3 4 4 2 3 4 3 4 3 2 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3

95

1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 4 3 4 4 2 3

96

1 1 3 1 1 4 1 1 4 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 4 2 1 4 1 1 4 2 1 4 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 4 1 1 4 1 1 4 2 1 3 1 1 4 2 1 4 ; PROC ANOVA; CLASS ICMLARGE LARGESIZE; MODEL DSEL = ICMLARGE; MEANS ICMLARGE/SNK; MEANS LARGESIZE/SNK;

97

APPENDIX H RAW DATA

Big Retailers (R) Q1 Q3 Sr number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Q4

Q5

Q6 Q7 CheckiCheckiGeneraAbility tSynchrCR - E RFID EDI 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 2 3 4 4 2 3 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 2 4 4 4 5 4 3 4 2 4 5 5 2 3 2 4 4 4 5 3 3 3 2 4 5 5 5 4 4 2 5 4 5 4 4 5 4 5 5 4 5 5 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 3 5 5 5 4

QRDS DSS 4 4 4 4 5 1 3 4 4 3 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 5 1 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 4

Q8 Q9 Centra DecentThe low The low The leaThe suOccurr 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 4

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

98

Big Suppliers (S) Q1 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Sr num Supp Below Below BusineCheckiCheckiGeneraAbility tSynchrCR - E RFID EDI QRDS DSS Centra DecentThe low low leaThe suOccurr The The 1 1 2 2 1 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 4 4 4 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 4 4 5 4 4 1 3 5 4 5 1 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 2 1 4 4 4 3 2 1 1 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 2 2 4 1 2 2 1 3 5 5 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 1 3 3 4 4 4 5 1 2 2 1 2 4 3 3 3 2 2 5 3 5 1 3 4 3 4 4 6 1 2 2 1 3 5 4 3 2 2 2 5 3 4 1 3 3 4 4 5 7 1 2 2 1 4 4 4 1 4 2 3 5 3 4 1 3 3 2 3 2 8 1 2 2 1 4 4 4 4 3 2 2 4 4 4 1 3 4 4 3 3 9 1 2 2 1 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 5 5 5 1 3 2 2 3 3 10 1 2 2 1 5 5 3 3 2 1 2 4 4 4 1 2 3 3 3 3 11 1 2 2 1 3 5 3 3 3 2 2 4 4 4 1 3 3 2 2 2 12 1 2 2 1 5 3 4 3 3 2 2 5 5 5 1 3 4 3 4 3 13 1 1 2 1 3 4 3 3 2 2 1 4 4 4 1 3 3 2 3 3 14 1 2 2 1 3 4 3 4 2 1 2 4 5 4 1 2 3 3 4 3 15 1 2 2 1 3 4 4 3 3 1 4 4 4 4 1 4 3 4 4 4 17 1 2 2 1 4 4 3 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 1 4 4 5 4 4 18 1 2 2 1 3 5 4 3 4 2 2 4 4 4 1 3 3 3 4 3 19 1 2 2 1 3 4 4 3 3 2 2 4 4 4 1 3 3 3 3 3 20 1 2 2 1 2 4 3 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 1 3 3 4 3 4 21 1 2 2 1 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 4 5 5 1 3 2 3 3 3

99

Big Wholesalers (W) Q1 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Sr num Supp Below Below BusineCheckiCheckiGeneraAbility tSynchrCR - E RFID EDI 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 5 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 5 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 5 3 5 4 2 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 5 3 5 4 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 2 5 3 5 4 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4

Q8 Q9 QRDS DSS Centra DecentThe low low leaThe suOccurr The The 3 4 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 3 4 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 1 3 3 2 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 2 3 4 2 4 3 4 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 4 2 4 3 2 4

100

Big Distributor (D) Q1 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Busine CheckiCheckiGeneraAbility tSynchrCR - E RFID EDI Sr num Supp Below Below 1 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 4 4

Q8 Q9 QRDS DSS Centra DecentThe low low leaThe suOccurr The The 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 3

101

Small Wholesaler (w) Q1 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Sr num Supp Below Below BusineCheckiCheckiGeneraAbility tSynchrCR - E RFID EDI 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 1 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 4 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 2

Q8 Q9 QRDS DSS Centra DecentThe low low leaThe suOccurr The The 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 2 4 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 2 2 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3

102

Small Retailers Q1 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Busine CheckiCheckiGeneraAbility tSynchrCR - E RFID EDI Sr num Supp Below Below 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 1 2 2 3 3 4 2 1 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 3 4 3 2 4 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 1 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 4 3 2 3 2 4 5 3 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 3 4 2 4 3 2 3

Q8 Q9 QRDS DSS Centra DecentThe low low leaThe suOccurr The The 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 4 4 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 4 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 5 2 2 2 4 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 2 4 3 3 4 2 2 4 3 4 4 2 3 3 4 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 2 2 3 3 4 3 4 4 2 3 2 4 4

104

Small Supplier (s) Q1 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Sr num Supp Below Below Busine CheckiCheckiGeneraAbility tSynchrCR - E RFID EDI QRDS DSS Centra DecentThe low low leaThe suOccurr The The 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 3 3 4 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 4 2 3 4 4 5 1 1 1 2 3 3 2 2 3 1 1 2 2 2 1 4 4 4 3 4 6 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 7 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 3 3 8 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 4 4 1 1 2 2 2 1 4 4 4 3 3 9 1 1 1 2 3 3 2 3 3 1 1 3 3 3 1 3 3 4 4 4 10 1 1 1 2 4 3 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 2 1 4 3 4 4 4 11 1 1 1 2 3 3 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 2 1 4 4 3 4 4 12 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 4 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 13 1 1 1 2 3 3 4 3 2 1 1 3 2 2 1 4 4 4 3 4 14 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 4 2 3 2 3 3 3 4 4

105

PERMISSION TO COPY

In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a masters degree at Texas Tech University or Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, I agree that the Library and my major department shall make it freely available for research purposes. Permission to copy this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Director of the Library or my major professor. It is understood that any copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my further written permission and that any user may be liable for copyright infringement.

Agree (Permission is granted.)

Swapnil D. Pande Student Signature

05 / 05 / 2005 Date

Disagree (Permission is not granted.)

_______________________________________________ Student Signature

_________________ Date