Reverse logistics (RL), an area of prime significance in the supply chain, has gained considerable ground in the last decade (Jayant et al., 2011). Industry practitioners and researchers have focussed on RL to enable organizations to attain competitive gain (Bernon and Cullen, 2007). According to Stock (1998), RL: “From a business logistics perspective… refers to the role of logistics in product returns, source reduction, recycling, materials substitution, reuse of materials, waste disposal, and refurbishing, repair and remanufacturing; from an engineering logistics perspective, it is referred to as reverse logistics management (RLM) and is a systematic business model that applies best logistics engineering and management methodologies across the enterprise in order to profitably close the loop on the supply chain.” (pp. 20-21) Product returns constitute 20 percent of everything sold to customers (Kumar and Chatterjee, 2011). This varies by product and channel type. Moreover, with challenging economic conditions, addressing returns within the reverse supply chain can help to cut costs, increase profit margins or both. RL is a $12 billion industry in India and contributes 13% of the GDP and with an enormous scope to provide the edge the companies are looking for (Anon, 2013). Also, over 92 percent of Indian retail businesses comes from the unorganized retail sector, thus offering tremendous potential for growth, consolidation, and modernization in the Indian context (Atroley and Rajat, 2014). With the degree of returns varying across industrial segments due to different return policies and legal regulations, the frequency of returns becomes essential, which might influence profitability and performance by investing in RL. There had been a continued focus on the forward supply chain, but with an increase in global competitiveness, it has become increasingly important for organizations to divert its attention towards the reverse chain as well (Kumar and Chatterjee, 2011). With an increasing trend in online marketplaces, the returns have also increased, with an estimated $800 million to $1 billion being returned in the fiscal year 2015-16, thus causing logistical challenges and potential losses (Julka and Ganguly, 2015). Despite well devised return policies, there have been fraudulent returns for which systems need to be devised for tracking customer behaviors (Julka and Ganguly, 2015). To design these systems, organizations need to allocate adequate resources, thus making resource commitment a critical construct in RL. The shift in organizational attention towards the reverse supply chain was to benefit from the supply chain, including benefits from a strategic perspective. An emphasis on the reverse chain results in greater returns, improved customer satisfaction and increased public perception as a result of handling the product returns efficiently and incorporating customer feedback (Johns, 2014; Robinson, 2015). Other strategic benefits include greater market share, reduced business risks and environmental sustainability, which might result from environmental regulations for product returns, thus enabling organizations to attain the strategic edge (Johns, 2014). To acquire the strategic benefits and to address fraudulent product returns, information technology (IT) systems – notably, information systems (IS) – are needed to enable organizations to manage the logistical activities efficiently and reduce losses due to product returns (Julka & Ganguly, 2015). These systems also enable organizations to track customer feedback, allowing them to enhance product quality, hence creating value for the customer. The selection of appropriate IS for the reverse supply chain and the ensuing IS practices are important and research-worthy. The principal objectives of this study are threefold.