Literature Review (USPS Financial Crisis)

1

Literature Review Outline

Christian O. Ogbebor Sr

Nova Southeastern University

Professor Su

RES – 8200 – L03

July 6, 2026

Literature Review Outline: Financial Sustainability of the U.S. Postal Service (USPS)

I. Introduction

· Introduction to financial crisis of the USPS and need to look at structural issues and the need for evidence-based solutions.

· Objectives of the literature review: to combine the empirical evidence from the financial sustainability, operational efficiency and policy reforms in the postal sector (Ittmann, 2023; Borowiec, 2021).

II. Structural Causes of Postal Financial Decline

· The volume of letters sent globally has been falling due to digital communication and how it affects postal revenues (Drab-Kurowska & Budziewicz-Guzlecka, 2021; Ittmann, 2023).

· The universal service obligations and the fixed operating expenses (Borowiec, 2021, Rogowski et al., 2022) pressured by financial constraints of universal service obligations and fixed operational costs.

III. Operational Efficiency and Technological Innovation

· The Internet of Things (IoT) is being adopted and postal productivity and cost efficiency are being improved (Balaz et al., 2024).

· Areas of digital transformation strategies and their short and long-term financial sustainability (Drab-Kurowska & Budziewicz-Guzlecka, 2021; Ittmann, 2023).

IV. Network Optimization and Delivery Innovation

· Flexible last-mile delivery options to make it more competitive and less expensive to deliver (Blagojevic et al., 2023).

· Operational Performance and revenue diversification of postal operators (Jovanovic et al. 2024).

· Designing a postal network and its access (Morales Sarriera & Schwartz, 2021; Pamucar et al., 2025) via GIS and multicriteria decision models.

V. Policy Reform and Financial Sustainability

· Substitutes for universal postal services through other financing systems, such as subsidies and compensation systems (Borowiec, 2021).

· System dynamics evidence for integrated reforms – revenue diversification, cost restructuring and regulatory change (Ittmann, 2023).

VI. Research Gap and Conclusion

· Previous studies focus on operational improvements and do not offer an abundance of evidence that shows how policy, financial, and technological changes can be integrated for the USPS.

· The study fills that void by exploring the possibility of comprehensive structural changes that could lead to a more financially sustainable USPS in the long-term.

References

Balaz, M., Vaculik, J., & Corejova, T. (2024). Evaluation of the impact of the Internet of Things on postal service efficiency in Slovakia. Economies, 12(10), 271. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies12100271

Blagojevic, M., Sarac, D., & Mostarac, K. (2023). Selecting the flexible last-mile delivery models using multicriteria decision-making. Promet - Traffic & Transportation, 35(5), 635–654. https://doi.org/10.7307/ptt.v35i5.292

Borowiec, L. (2021). Direct subsidies and compensation funds in financing of universal postal services. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(3), 545–564. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2021.8.3(34)

Drab-Kurowska, A., & Budziewicz-Guzlecka, A. (2021). The digital post ecosystem: Example of Poland in the context of research. Sustainability, 13(5), 2701. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052701

Ittmann, H. W. (2023). The postal performance of the South African Post Office: An international and local perspective. Journal of Transport and Supply Chain Management, 17, a948. https://doi.org/10.4102/jtscm.v17i0.948

Ittmann, H. W. (2023). Postal digital transformation dynamics: A system dynamics approach. Systems, 11(10), 508. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11100508

Jovanovic, B., Sarac, D., & Cacic, N. (2024). Performance benchmarking of European postal incumbents with TOPSIS and BMW-TOPSIS. Utilities Policy, 91, 101797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.up.2024.101797

Morales Sarriera, J., & Schwartz, A. E. (2021). Strategies to reduce postal network access points: From demographic to spatial distribution criteria. Utilities Policy, 69, 101175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2021.101175

Pamucar, D., Dobrodolac, M., Simic, V., Lazarevic, D., & Gorcun, O. F. (2025). An interval rough improved ordinal priority approach-based decision support system to redesign postal and logistics networks. Technology in Society, 80, 102774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102774

Rogowski, J. C., Gerring, J., Maguire, M., & Cojocaru, L. (2022). Public infrastructure and economic development: Evidence from postal systems. American Journal of Political Science, 66(4), 885–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12594

Assignment 4 – Theoretical Framework and Literature Review (15 points) Using the annotated bibliography from Assignment 2 and the Topic Outline from Assignment 3, the student will develop a coherent literature review using 10 peer-reviewed journal articles based on empirical research derived from primary sources. Note: These SHOULD be the same sources used in Assignments 2 and 3; however, if any of the 10 sources used in Assignment 2 were not peer-reviewed journal articles based on empirical research and derived from primary sources then additional sources will need to be included. An NSU librarian will provide additional training on utilizing the library databases in preparation for this assignment. The paper should be approximately 5 to 7 pages in length (not including cover page and reference section) and adhere to APA style. Theoretical Framework The theoretical framework section (sometimes referred to as the theoretical perspective or foundation) can be located in the discipline-based literature. The theory is typically identified once the student has identified the problem statement and reviews the discipline-based literature for the background and significance of the problem. After examining recent studies that have addressed the problem, at least one overarching theory should be identified. For the first sentence, you could use the following script to write out the theoretical perspective: The problem of ___ (problem) is grounded in the ___ (theory and name). This theory was originally developed by ___ (name and year) and was primarily used to study ___ (identify topics where this theory was applied including sources). The theory of ___ (theory name) indicates that ___ (discuss premise and propositions of theory in several sentences). After completing this sentence, continue writing a full description of your theoretical framework. This should clearly explain how the selected theory helps to understand or explain your research problem. This section should be approximately one page in length.

Literature Review

For this literature review, you will create a thematic literature review on the research topic that you plan to focus on for your capstone. A thematic review is a synthesized literature review; similar to the study-by-study review, the articles are organized by themes. However, instead of discussing each study separately, a thematic review presents the studies in a synthesized manner that ties the studies together using transitional techniques. Rather than presenting them as one article after another, as the annotated bibliography and a study-by-study review does, a thematic literature review may have multiple authors who expressed similar thoughts incorporated into one or more paragraphs. This literature review should be 5 to 6 pages.

Grading Rubric

Element	Met	Partially Met	Not Met
Theoretical Framework (5 points)	An appropriate theoretical framework is included and discussed in detail. (5 points)	An appropriate theoretical framework is included. (1-4 points)	A theoretical or conceptual framework is not included or not appropriate. (0 points)
Literature Review -- Organization (4 points)	The literature review is well organized, with a clear hierarchy and transition tying the studies together in a meaningful way. (4 points)	The literature review is somewhat organized but the hierarchy is not apparent. Transitions are included to tie most articles together. (1-3 point)	The literature review lacks organization and fails to tie the studies together in any meaningful way. (0 points)
Literature Review -- Readability (6 points)	The student provides sufficient details for the empirical studies, critically evaluates the articles, and flows smoothly from one section to the next using appropriate transitions. (6 points)	The student provides some detail for the empirical studies, attempts to evaluate most of the articles, but fails to use appropriate transition sentences to flow from one section to the next. (1-5 points)	The student fails to provide study details, evaluate the articles, include appropriate transitions, and/or uses an excessive number of direct quotes. (0 points)
Literature Review -- Overall (6 points)	The literature review is well organized, logically written, and comprehensively demonstrative of the current research based on the identified problem. (6 points)	The literature review is logically written, and demonstrates current research based on the identified problem. (1-5 points)	The literature review is not logically written and does not demonstrate current research based on identified problem. (0 points)
Sources (5 points)	At least 10 peer-reviewed journal articles are included the directly relate to the research problem. The articles are empirically based and considered primary sources. (5 points)	At least 8 - 10 sources are included the directly relate to the research problem. The articles are mostly empirically based and considered primary sources. (1-4 points)	Less than 8 sources are included and/or the sources do not relate to the chosen topic, are not peer-reviewed, empirically based, or considered primary sources. (0 points)
Writing and APA Style (4 points)	Writing is clear and concise. Proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation is used. Citations are included and written in correct APA style. (4 points)	Writing is unclear and includes some grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors. Citations are included. There are some minor APA style errors. (1-3 point)	Numerous grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors. Citations are not included and/or there are numerous APA style errors. (0 points)