Commercial Policies and Purchase Experience: Comparison between Mlv and Shp

Danilo Vicente; Nicole Cerci Mostagi

DOI: 10.22167/2675-6528-202602833

Article derived from a Final Course Work (TCC), with content based on the student’s original work and adapted to the editorial format of the E&S Magazine with the support of the ResumeAI tool, an artificial intelligence solution developed by Instituto Pecege for textual synthesis and organization.

Abstract

The growth of e-commerce has amplified the relevance of marketplaces in the consumer’s purchasing journey, especially for higher-value acquisitions, where trust, clarity of information, and commercial policies have gained greater weight in the decision. The objective was to compare the commercial policies and the purchasing experience on two marketplace platforms in Brazil, with an emphasis on the perception of trust, user experience, and the acquisition of a higher-value kitchen faucet. The research was developed through a comparative case study, with a mixed approach, based on simulating the purchase of the same product on both platforms and applying a structured interview to three consumers with online shopping experience. Aspects related to navigation, interface, product information, shipping, installment plans, reputation, support, returns, and overall satisfaction were observed. The results indicated that both platforms presented positive aspects. However, MLV obtained a more favorable evaluation regarding navigation organization, information clarity, detail of commercial policies, support structure, and perceived consumer security. SHP, in turn, demonstrated ease of access and functional resources, but revealed greater dependence on the seller’s performance and less robustness in higher-value purchases, which resulted in a more favorable evaluation of MLV in the overall purchasing experience. It was concluded that the purchasing decision in marketplaces does not depend on a single aspect, but on a set of elements that constitute the consumer experience, with MLV being perceived more favorably in situations requiring greater security, clarity, and predictability.

Keywords: E-commerce; Consumer trust; Purchase decision; Marketplaces.

1. Introduction

The growth of e-commerce has increased the relevance of marketplaces in the Brazilian consumer’s purchasing journey, especially for higher-value acquisitions. This scenario was driven by changes in consumer behavior in recent years, particularly after the COVID-19 pandemic, which accelerated the shift to the digital market and consolidated e-commerce as one of the main purchasing channels, favored by increased internet access, convenience, and trust in digital platforms (Rodrigues et al., 2025).

In this context, marketplaces hold a prominent position in Brazil, concentrating a significant portion of online sales (Link; Larentis, 2023). This study focuses on two platforms, fictitiously named Marketplace 1 (MLV) and Marketplace 2 (SHP), which have distinct trajectories. MLV is generally perceived as more reliable, while SHP, despite having grown rapidly in lower-value categories, still faces challenges in advancing in higher value-added segments, where consumer insecurity is more pronounced (Krupczak; Veiga, 2024; Rodrigues et al., 2025; Link; Larentis, 2023).

For the online consumer, the purchase decision is not based solely on price. Factors such as seller reputation, clarity of return policies, platform usability, and trust conveyed by the marketplace exert strong influence, especially for high-value products (Krupczak; Veiga, 2024; Link; Larentis, 2023). In these acquisitions, perceived risk is higher, and security and trust become even more important. The shopping experience, which encompasses everything from item search on the platform to after-sales support, is also a determining factor, requiring clear information, ease of use, and good service (Rodrigues et al., 2025).

Trust in the digital environment is built by how marketplaces present sellers, with information such as sales history and reputation badges that convey security and reduce buyer insecurity, especially for more expensive products (Silva, Resch, and Pereira, 2023). Furthermore, trust extends to the marketplace’s own brand, which, by offering delivery guarantees, resolving problems, and maintaining clear return policies, becomes a competitive advantage in higher-value purchases (Rodrigues et al., 2025; Silva, Resch, and Pereira, 2023).

Given this scenario, the central problem of this research arises: What differences in commercial policies and purchasing experience can be observed between MLV and SHP in purchases of higher added value? Understanding these differences is crucial, as the perception of trust, the platform’s user experience, and the clarity of commercial policies are decisive elements for the consumer, especially in higher-value transactions. Thus, this study is justified by the need to deepen the knowledge about how marketplace platforms differentiate themselves in building trust and offering a robust purchasing experience for higher added value products. The general objective of this research is to compare the commercial policies and the purchasing experience in MLV and SHP, considering the perception of trust, the platform’s user experience, and the purchase of a higher added value product, represented in this study by the kitchen mixer, reference 1256.C37, belonging to a recognized brand in the segment.

2. Material and Methods

The research was conducted as a comparative case study, of an applied nature, with a mixed approach, which integrated quantitative and qualitative elements. The central objective was to compare the purchasing experience of the same product with higher added value on two marketplace platforms, seeking to observe the organization of navigation, the presentation of information to the consumer, and the structure of commercial policies throughout the purchasing journey.

For the standardization of the analysis, a specific sanitary metal fitting was selected, a reference kitchen mixer 1256.C37, from a recognized brand in the premium segment. The choice of this product aimed to reduce external interferences in the analysis, allowing the observed differences to be attributed to the way each marketplace presents information and organizes purchase conditions, rather than to variations between products or sellers.

The marketplace platforms studied were fictitiously named MLV and SHP, maintaining this standardization throughout the work to preserve the identification of the companies. The methodology was structured in two main data collection stages. The first stage consisted of simulating the purchase of the selected product on the MLV and SHP platforms, through directed observation in a mobile environment, with the purpose of recording and comparing elements related to the purchasing experience and the commercial policies adopted in each marketplace.

In this simulation, navigation began with the search for the product reference and followed the path of a common consumer. Previously defined aspects were recorded, such as platform access, product information, shipping conditions, installment options, seller reputation, support channels, and return policies.

Data collection for this stage occurred from the location of the product advertisement on both platforms, using the search field to simulate the path taken by a consumer. Throughout the navigation, the mentioned elements were observed and recorded, and the screens were captured to document the information presented to the consumer.

The second stage of the research involved applying a structured interview to three consumers with frequent online shopping experience on the MLV and SHP platforms. The participants were identified as Interviewee 1, Interviewee 2, and Interviewee 3, ensuring the anonymity of their names. The interview was sent individually via WhatsApp, in Word format, and contained 15 questions designed to investigate participants’ perception of the shopping experience on both platforms. The applications took place on February 22, February 24, and February 26.

The participant selection criteria were based on their online shopping experience, seeking individuals who already had frequent contact with the platforms studied. This condition was considered essential so that they could evaluate, with greater propriety, the elements of the shopping experience and the commercial policies analyzed.

For the data analysis, the information collected in the two stages was organized by themes. The screenshots of the purchase simulation were categorized according to the observed aspects, such as platform access, product information, shipping, installment payments, reputation, support, and returns.

The respondents’ answers, in turn, were gathered according to the dimensions evaluated in the questionnaire, considering the written justifications and the scores assigned to each platform. Subsequently, a comparison was made between the elements observed in the applications and consumer perception, relating the findings to the literature used in the study.

The integration of the collected data allowed us to relate the direct observation of the experience on the platforms with user perception. This approach sought to provide a comprehensive understanding of commercial policies and the shopping experience in MLV and SHP, according to the general objective of the research.

3. Results and Discussion

The comparative analysis of commercial policies and the shopping experience on the MLV and SHP platforms revealed significant nuances in how each marketplace approaches the consumer journey, especially in higher-value acquisitions. The results indicated that, although both platforms offer functional features, MLV demonstrated a more robust organization and a clearer presentation of information, which contributed to a perception of greater trust and security on the part of consumers. The research sought to understand how navigation, interface, product information, shipping, installment payments, reputation, support, and returns manifest on each platform, influencing the purchase decision of a high-value kitchen mixer.

Commercial Policies and Shopping Experience in Marketplaces

Observing the initial stages of the purchase journey, focusing on platform access and ad viewing, revealed that MLV facilitates a more direct product search. The search bar is prominent on the home screen, and after typing the item’s reference, the user finds several ads for the same product, allowing for the verification of other offers and sellers within the navigation flow itself. This organization, as Krupczak and Veiga (2024) highlight, is crucial for the consumer to understand the available options and proceed with the purchase with greater confidence and less effort.

In MLV, the platform brings together, within the search flow itself, more detailed filters and different ads for the same item, offering clearer paths for comparing offers. This structure contributes to a feeling of greater control during the search for the product and seller. The interviewees corroborated this perception, pointing out that MLV offers more detailed filters and search refinement options, although one of them noted a limitation in the direct comparison between ads within the navigation itself, suggesting that barriers still persist in evaluating alternatives (Interviewee 1, 2, 3).

In SHP, product access also proved functional, but with more summarized navigation. The search directs the user to related ads, and seller verification depends more on reading the ad and accessing the specific store. Although this path is effective, comparing alternatives tends to require greater consumer attention. Buffara et al. (2023) emphasize that the interface and visual clarity are determinants in the platform’s user experience, and SHP, in this aspect, presented an interface that some interviewees considered visually more cluttered (Interviewee 1, 2, 3).

SHP was perceived as practical in product search, especially due to the use of the camera, which facilitates item location without the need to type many details (Interviewee 3). However, MLV was evaluated as more complete in search comparisons, as it gathers a larger amount of useful information, while SHP presented a more summarized visualization (Interviewee 2). In summary, MLV tends to facilitate search by integrating elements that help the consumer locate, compare, and better understand the ad, while SHP, despite its initial practicality, requires more attention to evaluate alternatives at the beginning of the purchase journey.

The analysis of freight information revealed that both platforms present this data, but with distinct levels of detail. In MLV, the delivery time, the possibility of pickup, and other shipping conditions are displayed with greater clarity, even at the search stage. This visibility tends to reduce doubts and favor a quicker decision. Sucena and Cury (2024) and Dias (2021) emphasize that clarity regarding deadlines, shipping, and delivery directly impacts the consumer’s perception of service quality and purchase intention.

The MLV was perceived as a platform that presents shipping conditions more completely, objectively informing benefits such as free shipping, installment payments, and delivery forecasts. On SHP, although shipping is also visible, part of this information depends on more interaction to be accessed, and the understanding of shipping conditions tends to depend more on the use of coupons and additional navigation steps (Interviewee 1). This difference suggests that the consumer not only evaluates the existence of the benefit but also the ease with which they understand it in practice.

The installment conditions were also examined, and in the MLV, the information appears prominently on the product page, allowing the consumer to quickly view the number of installments and the corresponding value. The platform also signals other payment and credit possibilities, expanding the options available to the user. Rodrigues et al. (2025) highlight that payment methods influence consumer behavior and purchasing decisions, especially for higher-value products.

The interviewees perceived MLV as a platform that presents more complete information about purchase conditions, including free shipping, installment type, and delivery forecast (Interviewee 1). Although both platforms show this information clearly (Interviewee 2), MLV stands out for bringing together, with greater visibility, the number of installments, the corresponding amount, the available payment methods, and complementary paths to consult other modalities, making the reading of payment conditions more detailed for the consumer.

In SHP, installment payments are also visible on the product screen, but in a more summarized way. In the initial view, the consumer identifies how many installments the purchase can be divided into, but needs to access other screens to better understand the conditions. The platform also presents SParcelado as an alternative of its own credit, which requires more attention from the user to differentiate between installment payments on the card and the platform’s own credit. Oliveira (2024) points out that clarity about installments, interest, and payment conditions reduces doubts and favors a more secure decision.

The SHP was perceived as a platform that offers installment payments in an acceptable way, but with less detail than the MLV (Interviewee 1). Although both present information clearly and simply (Interviewee 2, 3), the MLV conveys a greater sense of completeness, while the SHP stands out for its initial practicality, but with less detail. The SHP could improve the visual distinction between its payment methods for more immediate consumer understanding.

The seller’s and listing’s reputation is a crucial factor for higher-value products, as consumers seek signals to reduce insecurity. In MLV, reputation is prominently displayed at the top of the listing, with indicators such as sales volume and item rating. Seller information, like account identification and overall sales volume, is also easily accessible, facilitating an initial assessment of the offer. Krupczak and Veiga (2024) and Link and Larentis (2023) highlight that trust in the digital environment is built through the presence of reviews, sales history, and seller data.

This organization was perceived positively by the interviewees, who considered the information easy to locate and useful when reading the advertisement (Interviewee 2). The ease of access to the seller’s history and customer service notes on the platforms was also mentioned (Interviewee 3). The MLV allows access to other seller products and viewing of item-related reviews within the catalog, expanding the information available for comparison. Reputation serves as a reinforcement of trust before purchase, with one interviewee reporting consulting opinions from those who have already bought when doubts remain (Interviewee 2).

In SHP, reputation is also accessible, but with a different logic, focusing more on signals of trust in the store’s overall performance than on the specific product history. Silva, Resch, and Pereira (2023) emphasize that the visibility of seller reviews and information helps build trust. SHP highlights the store’s average rating, the volume of reviews, and buyer comments, in addition to seller profile information and access to the store’s catalog, allowing consumers to understand who is selling and how the store is rated.

This organization was perceived positively by one participant, who highlighted the clarity of reputation information on both platforms (Interviewee 1). Another interviewee mentioned the ease of access to the seller’s history and service notes (Interviewee 3). However, in SHP, these signals are more gathered around the store, causing the evaluation of item reliability to depend on more careful observation throughout the navigation, which, according to Krupczak and Veiga (2024), interferes with the perception of trust.

The support provided by the platforms was also analyzed, as accessible customer service channels and clear answers are crucial for the digital experience (Silva and Russo, 2019). In MLV, support does not appear at the beginning of the screen, but becomes available as the user progresses through the ad, with a question area and the possibility of sending questions to the seller, in addition to consulting already registered answers. This organization expands the support possibilities before the purchase, and the interviewees considered these channels easy to find (Interviewee 2).

After the purchase, MLV support proves to be even more structured, with options related to the order, such as “Help with the purchase,” which brings together paths for situations like product with a problem, incomplete item, or questions about the invoice. The platform directs the user to both the virtual assistant and contact with the seller, offering various ways to handle the situation. This structure was perceived as easier to locate and use (Interviewee 1), faster and more reliable (Interviewee 3), conveying security to the consumer.

In SHP, support is also present, but with a logic more linked to contact with the store, bringing the consumer closer to the seller both on the product page and after purchase, which, according to Silva, Resch, and Pereira (2023), helps reduce insecurity. The consumer finds the chat icon to talk to the store, and after purchase, there are help options such as “Report problem” and “Talk to the seller”, indicating contact and referral paths throughout the purchase. The interviewees perceived that the channels are easy to find and that the resolution tends to occur fairly (Interviewee 2).

However, the support experience at SHP was not perceived with the same solidity as MLV, with evaluations that the service can seem more confusing (Interviewee 1) and that certain situations depend more on the seller than on the platform (Interviewee 3). This suggests that, although the resources exist, they are felt in a less centralized way by the consumer. MLV stands out for the standardization of service pathways, while SHP presents less centralization of support within the platform itself, which interferes with the sense of support and trust built throughout the purchase.

Return policies were also analyzed, and in the MLV, the return is visibly displayed on the product page, with the possibility of free returns and a 30-day period after receipt. The “Guaranteed Purchase” section reinforces protection in situations such as remorse or non-receipt, integrating the policy into the listing and contributing to a greater sense of security before purchase. Koch and Gasparetto (2024) highlight that clear and easily accessible policies reduce the perceived risk in online shopping.

One of the interviewees commented that there are legal return guarantees and that MLV conveys more confidence in this aspect (Interviewee 2). Another reported that the experience of exchange, cancellation, and refund worked well on both platforms, but MLV was associated with a more robust structure and greater speed in the process (Interviewee 3). In the post-purchase phase, the return process on MLV remains straightforward, with the “Free Return” option on the order screen and the virtual assistant guiding the consumer on the reason for the return and the next steps, centralizing the flow.

In SHP, returns are present, but with a less direct logic, requiring a longer journey for the consumer to find the complete rules. Access to the policy depends on additional steps, such as returning to the homepage and entering the Help Center to access return and refund information. Although the platform offers detailed rules on acceptance criteria and evidence requirements, they are not integrated as immediately into the main listing flow, which, according to Koch and Gasparetto (2024), can influence trust.

Participants perceived that the SHP tends to resolve problems fairly (Interviewee 2), but there was also the perception that, despite working, it can be slow in reimbursement in some situations (Interviewee 3). This suggests that the policy exists and operates, but does not convey the same predictability at the beginning of the purchase. The main difference between the platforms, in this aspect, lies less in the existence of the return and more in the stage at which this policy becomes more visible to the consumer, with the MLV highlighting it earlier and more integrated into the advertisement.

In summary of the analyzed commercial policies, shipping in MLV showed greater clarity regarding deadlines, costs, and delivery options, positively influencing the perception of speed and trust, in line with Sucena and Cury (2024) and Dias (2021). Returns in MLV demonstrated greater ease and clarity in rules, reducing the fear of problems and increasing purchase security, according to Koch and Gasparetto (2024). Installment payments in MLV offered a larger number of installments and clarity in conditions, affecting the purchase decision, as pointed out by Rodrigues et al. (2025) and Oliveira (2024).

The support on MLV, with available service channels and efficient response time, generated a sense of support and security in after-sales service, aligned with Silva and Russo (2019) and Silva, Resch, and Pereira (2023). The reputation on MLV, with reviews, ratings, and visual indicators, helped the consumer to trust and choose the seller or platform, according to Link and Larentis (2023), Krupczak and Veiga (2024), and Silva, Resch, and Pereira (2023). In contrast, SHP presented these elements in a more summarized way or with less initial visibility, requiring greater consumer attention.

When considering the overall shopping experience, respondents evaluated both platforms positively, but MLV was frequently pointed out as having an advantage, especially for higher-value products. The general perception was one of satisfaction, with a preference for MLV (Interviewee 1). The higher rating given to MLV was associated with greater platform usage and the comfort already built with this experience (Interviewee 2). MLV was linked to a longer company history, more security, and better visual organization, while SHP was perceived as a growing platform with a progressive gain in confidence (Interviewee 3).

This reading aligns with Melo Caires and Carvalho (2024), who show how overall satisfaction in e-commerce is influenced by the set of interactions throughout the purchase journey. Positive experiences foster trust, repurchase, and platform retention. Thus, MLV tends to more frequently convey a perception of security, familiarity, and comfort to the consumer, while SHP, although well-evaluated, still seeks to consolidate this perception in higher-value segments.

The numerical synthesis of the respondents’ evaluations confirmed the observed trend, with MLV obtaining more favorable averages across all dimensions. In platform navigation, MLV achieved an average of 4.6, compared to SHP’s 4.0, indicating better search, filters, and comparison. In interface and usability, MLV scored 5.0, surpassing SHP with 4.5, suggesting a clearer and more organized layout. Product information on MLV averaged 4.4, while SHP registered 4.0, pointing to greater clarity in images and description on MLV.

In platform trust, MLV reached 5.0, compared to SHP’s 4.6, reinforcing its greater perceived robustness and security. Customer service and support in MLV averaged 4.8, higher than SHP’s 4.2, indicating greater clarity and standardization. Finally, in overall satisfaction, MLV obtained 5.0, while SHP scored 3.8, evidencing a superior trend for MLV, especially in higher-value purchases. This data reinforces that the purchasing experience on platforms results from the combination of different dimensions, with MLV showing a more favorable trend in most analyzed elements.

In summary, the research showed that, although MLV and SHP offer important features for the online purchase of higher-value products, the consumer experience is not identical. MLV demonstrated a more favorable performance throughout the purchase journey, especially in the organization of navigation, clarity of product information, detail of shipping and installment conditions, presentation of reputation signals, support structure, and visibility of return policies. SHP, in turn, stood out for its practicality in some search features and payment alternatives, but was perceived as more summarized, more dependent on the seller’s performance, and with a lower sense of robustness in higher-value purchases, which impacts consumer perceived trust and security.

4. Conclusion

The study aimed to compare the commercial policies and the shopping experience on two marketplace platforms, MLV and SHP, focusing on the perception of trust, usability, and the acquisition of a higher-value kitchen mixer. It was found that the purchase decision in marketplaces is influenced by a complex set of factors, rather than a single aspect. The results indicated that, although both platforms offer functional features, MLV received a more favorable evaluation. It was observed that MLV stood out for its navigation organization, clarity of product information, detailed shipping and installment conditions, presentation of reputation signals, support structure, and visibility of return policies. SHP, on the other hand, demonstrated practicality in some search features and payment alternatives, but was perceived as more concise and less robust for higher-value purchases, which impacted consumer trust and perceived security. The main contribution of this study lies in reinforcing that the purchase decision in marketplaces with high added value is a combination of platform trust, user experience, and clarity of commercial policies, offering a practical understanding of the differences between platforms.

However, this study has important limitations. The analysis was based on a single high-value product and two specific platforms, with the participation of only three interviewees, which restricts the generalization of the findings to e-commerce as a whole. Furthermore, digital platforms are constantly evolving, and information, policies, and purchase flows may change over time, so the results reflect the context observed during the collection period. For future studies, it is suggested to increase the number of participants and include other product categories. It is also recommended to compare new platforms or monitor changes in interfaces and commercial policies to understand how they continuously affect the consumer experience.

Bibliographic References

BUFFARA, A. L. V.; ALMEIDA, G. B.; LOURES, N. R. R.; CICMANEC, E. O que podemos aprender com a experiência do usuário no comércio eletrônico. Caderno TCC FAE, 2023. Disponível em: <https://cadernotcc.fae.edu/cadernotcc/article/download/385/250>. Acesso em: 27 dez. 2025.

DIAS, Emília Guerra. Análise do comportamento do consumidor do comércio eletrônico em relação aos parâmetros da entrega. 2021. Dissertação (Mestrado em Geotecnia e Transportes) – Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, 2021. Disponível em: <https://repositorio.ufmg.br/server/api/core/bitstreams/270d78c7-cb05-4d5f-96ef-e549283a7225/content>. Acesso em: 24 mar. 2026.

KOCH, A.; GASPARETTO, V. Intenção de recompra no e-commerce: o papel da devolução leniente e dos custos transacionais. BASE – Revista de Administração e Contabilidade da Unisinos, São Leopoldo, v. 21, n. 1, 2024. Disponível em: <https://revistas.unisinos.br/index.php/base/article/download/25603/60750285/60807144>. Acesso em: 14 dez. 2025.

KRUPCZAK, L. C.; VEIGA, A. R. Comportamento de compra online no Brasil: motivações e fatores decisórios. Revista de Administração e Negócios da Amazônia, v. 16, n. 1, p. 45-62, 2024.Disponível em: <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385117485_Comportamento_de_compra_online_no_Brasil_motivacoes_e_fatores_decisorios>. Acesso em: 24 set. 2025.

LINK, D.; LARENTIS, F. Perfil e motivadores de compra online: quem são os consumidores do e-commerce? Latin American Journal of Business Management, v. 14, n. 1, p. 74-93, 2023. Disponível em: <https://www.lajbm.com.br/journal/article/download/725/356/2222>. Acesso em: 25 set. 2025.

MELO CAIRES, L. V.; CARVALHO, Í. B. Satisfação de clientes de e-commerce: um estudo de caso na indústria. Revista Vianna Sapiens, 2024. Disponível em: <https://www.viannasapiens.com.br/revista/article/download/976/475/3245>. Acesso em: 26 dez. 2025.

OLIVEIRA, C. A. O impacto das formas de pagamento no comportamento do consumidor em e-commerce. 2024. Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso (Graduação) – Centro Paula Souza. Disponível em: <https://ric.cps.sp.gov.br/bitstream/123456789/34622/1/O%20impacto%20das%20formas%20de%20pagamento%20no%20comportamento%20do%20consumidor%20em%20e-commerce..pdf>. Acesso em: 13 dez. 2025.

RODRIGUES, F. A.; FAUSTINO-DIAS, A. F.; MORAIS, M.; RECH, L. R.; AGUIAR, T. J. L. As mudanças do comportamento do consumidor pós-pandemia. Revista de Gestão e Secretariado, v. 16, n. 2, p. 210-229, 2025. Disponível em: <https://ojs.revistagesec.org.br/secretariado/article/view/4869>. Acesso em: 27 set. 2025.

SILVA, J. N.; RESCH, S.; PEREIRA, J. A. Marketplace: análise dos fatores que impactam no comportamento do consumidor. Revista EIGEDIN – Estudos Interdisciplinares em Gestão e Direito, v. 7, n. 1, 2023. Disponível em: <https://periodicos.ufms.br/index.php/EIGEDIN/article/download/17271/11770/>. Acesso em: 14 dez. 2025.

SILVA, M. R.; RUSSO, S. L. Aplicação de entrevistas em pesquisa qualitativa. Revista Confluências Culturais, v. 8, n. 2, p. 25-38, 2019. Disponível em: <https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/8367625.pdf>. Acesso em: 29 set. 2025.

SUCENA, M. P.; CURY, M. V. Q. Inteligência artificial aplicada para avaliação da percepção da qualidade da logística do e-commerce. Brazilian Business Review, 2024. Disponível em: <https://www.scielo.br/j/bbr/a/sVRWjLTjW83SDC5TVQX9tvp/?format=pdf&lang=pt>. Acesso em: 13 dez. 2025.

Article originating from the Final Course Work of Specialization in Digital Business from the MBA USP/Esalq

To learn more about the course, click here and access the MBX Academy platform