The $400 Express Delivery Shock: Who’s Really at Fault?
Project Background:
When Manager Huang received the call from the SF Express courier, he almost jumped out of his chair. Seven days earlier, he had placed a simple sample order worth 300 yuan ($45) with Factory A. During payment, he casually told the factory’s salesman Xiao Zhang, “When the sample is ready, send it to me by SF Express, freight collect.”
What seemed like a routine request turned into a nightmare. The sample itself wasn’t heavy, but due to its large dimensions, SF Express charged 400 yuan ($60) for air freight – more than the sample cost itself. Manager Huang’s face turned green. His first instinct was to refuse delivery and let Factory A bear the 800 yuan refusal fee to teach Xiao Zhang a lesson. But in the end, he sighed and paid the 400 yuan express fee.
The Difficulties:
This situation presented several challenging questions about responsibility in B2B transactions:
Who Should Take Responsibility? Most people would instinctively blame Xiao Zhang from Factory A. After all, shouldn’t the supplier have warned about such expensive shipping costs? In today’s competitive market, suppliers can’t just focus on themselves – they need to consider the customer’s total experience.
Risk Management Failure: Xiao Zhang failed to see the potential risks. If the customer had refused delivery, the double logistics fee would have fallen back on Factory A, creating an even bigger problem.
Communication Gap: There was a fundamental breakdown in communication about shipping costs and expectations, turning a simple sample request into a costly surprise.
Relationship Impact: Even though Factory A technically followed instructions, the incident threatened to damage what could be a valuable long-term relationship.
Our Solution:
As the sourcing intermediary, we analyzed this case from a different perspective and implemented a comprehensive approach:
1. Responsibility Clarification We helped both parties understand that while Xiao Zhang could have communicated better, the ultimate responsibility for cost control lies with the purchasing manager. Manager Huang’s job includes managing total costs – not just product costs, but logistics, operations, and all related expenses.
2. Process Education We educated our client that B2B procurement is fundamentally different from B2C shopping. Unlike Taobao where you can easily get refunds and platform intervention, B2B transactions require proactive management because:
- B2B suppliers often lack comprehensive after-sales service
- Traditional suppliers may not anticipate modern customer service expectations
- Problems in B2B transactions can have massive impacts and create difficult dilemmas
3. Prevention Systems We implemented protocols to avoid such situations, including:
- Mandatory shipping cost confirmation before sample dispatch
- Clear communication templates for cost-sensitive logistics
- Supplier training on proactive customer communication
4. Relationship Repair Despite Factory A not being technically wrong, we facilitated a conversation about the business reality: even when you’re “right,” customer perception matters. A few hundred yuan in goodwill can preserve relationships worth thousands.
The Result:
Our intervention turned a potential relationship disaster into a learning opportunity:
- Immediate Resolution: Factory A agreed to absorb part of the unexpected shipping costs as a goodwill gesture
- Process Improvement: Established clear shipping cost confirmation procedures for all future samples
- Relationship Preservation: What could have ended the supplier relationship instead strengthened it through better communication
- Cost Control: Implemented systems to prevent similar surprises across all client transactions
- Supplier Network Enhancement: Used this case to train our entire supplier network on proactive customer communication
Other Cases
English 
Español 
العربية 
Français 
Deutsch 
Bahasa Indonesia 
Italiano 
日本語 
Português 
Русский 
Türkçe