Channel Coordination for a Supply Chain with a Risk‐Neutral Manufacturer and a Loss‐Averse Retailer*

This articles considers a decentralized supply chain in which a single manufacturer is selling a perishable product to a single retailer facing uncertain demand. It differs from traditional supply chain contract models in two ways. First, while traditional supply chain models are based on risk neutrality, this article takes the viewpoint of behavioral principal–agency theory and assumes the manufacturer is risk neutral and the retailer is loss averse. Second, while gain/loss (GL) sharing is common in practice, there is a lack of analysis of GL‐sharing contracts in the supply chain contract literature. This article investigates the role of a GL‐sharing provision for mitigating the loss‐aversion effect, which drives down the retailer order quantity and total supply chain profit. We analyze contracts that include GL‐sharing‐and‐buyback (GLB) credit provisions as well as the special cases of GL contracts and buyback contracts. Our analytical and numerical results lend insight into how a manufacturer can design a contract to improve total supply chain, manufacturer, and retailer performance. In particular, we show that there exists a special class of distribution‐free GLB contracts that can coordinate the supply chain and arbitrarily allocate the expected supply chain profit between the manufacturer and retailer; in contrast with other contracts, the parameter values for contracts in this class do not depend on the probability distribution of market demand. This feature is meaningful in practice because (i) the probability distribution of demand faced by a retailer is typically unknown by the manufacturer and (ii) a manufacturer can offer the same contract to multiple noncompeting retailers that differ by demand distribution and still coordinate the supply chains.     

Vertical cost information sharing in a supply chain with value-adding retailers

We consider a supply chain consisting of one supplier and two value-adding heterogeneous retailers. Each retailer has full knowledge about his own value-added cost structure that is unknown to the supplier and the other retailer. Assuming there is no horizontal information sharing between two retailers, we model the supply chain with a three-stage game-theoretic framework. In the first stage each retailer decides if he is willing to vertically disclose his private cost information to the supplier. In the second stage, given the information he has about the retailers, the supplier announces the wholesale price to the retailers. In response to the wholesale price, in the third stage, the retailers optimize their own retail prices and the values added to the product, respectively. Under certain conditions, we prove the existence of equilibrium prices and added values. Furthermore, we obtain the condition under which both retailers are unwilling to vertically share their private information with the supplier, as well as the conditions under which both retailers have incentives to reveal their cost information to the supplier, thus leading to a win–win situation for the whole supply chain.     

Risk Mitigation Benefit from Backup Suppliers in the Presence of the Horizontal Fairness Concern

The backup supply strategy is demonstrated as an effective approach to mitigating supply risk. We study a supply chain in which a leader manufacturer designs a contract to a potential backup supplier to mitigate the yield uncertainty of the primary supplier. In this context, the backup supplier may compare with the primary supplier and have horizontal fairness concerns. We model the contract design problem using a Stackelberg game and characterize the optimal decisions for the manufacturer and backup supplier, in both fairness and off‐fairness settings. The theoretical results show that the leader manufacturer must sacrifice his own payoff to balance the payoffs of both suppliers. As a result, using a self‐interested backup supplier is the dominating strategy, whereas using a fair‐minded backup supplier is only suggested when the reliability of the primary supplier is low and the fairness concern of the backup supplier is not strong. Additionally, the backup supplier only benefits from fairness concerns when the level is not exceeding a threshold value. With regard to high fairness levels beyond this threshold, fairness concern has negative effects on the monetary payoff and even might lead to loss of the business. By conducting laboratory experiments, we provide evidence of the horizontal fairness concern from the backup supplier. Further, we show that if the primary supplier also has horizontal fairness concerns, the leader manufacturer can conditionally benefit from a promoted yield reliability due to an extra effort from the primary supplier.     

水平竞争条件下的供应链信息泄露策略

本文探讨非对称信息下,制造商针对议价能力不同的大型及小型零售商分别采用了收益共享、批发价合约时,大型零售商的市场信息被制造商泄露给竞争对手,从而对供应链产生的影响。通过对比有无信息泄露下各方成员的博弈过程,分析供应链信息泄露的原理;进而在制造商总是会泄露信息的前提下,构建基于信号传递的信息泄露下供应链成员决策模型,分别讨论分离均衡与混同均衡两种情形下,零售商的订货策略及其相应的收益。在此基础上进一步做出扩展,制造商有主动权以选择是否泄露信息的情况,对比分析零售商的策略选择问题。经过分析发现,出于自身利益的角度,制造商总是会泄露信息,从而导致供应链的整体利润下滑。对此,大型零售商的订货策略选择与市场需求的波动程度有关：波动较小则选择混同均衡;波动较大则选择分离均衡。特别地,当市场需求为低时,大型零售商的最优订货量会向下扭曲,即支付一定的“信息租金”作为应对信息泄露的代价。     

基于激励相容契约的ATO式供应链交叉协调研究

考虑由两个零部件供应商与单个制造商组成的按订单装配式供应链中的信息不对称问题。以完全信息下各成员的利润作为基准,分析了成本类型信息占优的单个供应商"信息伪装"对纵向制造商和横向互补供应商所造成的损失,提出了基于激励相容的供应商-制造商纵向契约和横向互补供应商参与下的交叉协调契约。通过数学建模和仿真数据分析,研究表明：制造商主导的针对单个信息不对称供应商的激励契约,会产生"低端向下扭曲"现象,降低了横向供应商的最优订单量;制造商与横向的信息对称供应商分担信息租金而形成的交叉协调,在显示真实成本信息的同时,还可以提高最优订单量和整个供应链的全局利润。     

存在竞争性制造商的集团采购供应链需求预测信息的共享与激励

针对两个竞争性制造商通过集团采购组织(GPO)采购部件时,是否向GPO共享需求预测信息的激励问题,考虑各制造商拥有有限信息、共享部分信息、基于产量竞争的情形,通过建立博弈模型,分析了竞争强度、信息精度和市场波动对信息共享价值的影响,进而提出了信息共享激励策略。研究表明:信息共享能够协调制造商间的竞争,当且仅当竞争强度超过某阈值时,信息共享能够增加供应链的系统预期利润,此时,用两部制补偿协议可激励制造商完全共享信息;当竞争强度和市场波动均较大时,通过信息共享激励,分散式决策能够实现比集中式决策更大的系统预期利润。最后,通过算例对研究结论进行了直观考察和说明。     

An integrated supplier-buyer model for improving supply chain coordination

This study develops a decision support model that can be used by a supplier in making production and price decisions at contract renewal times in a supply chain environment. The supplier first makes aggregate production decisions with a special attempt to estimate buyer commitments, and then determines the price of the item so as to satisfy his own profit and buyer cost reduction expectations simultaneously. Mathematical programming models are designed to achieve these in accordance with the contract terms. The main emphasis is placed upon the conceptual and negotiation aspects of the models, and some solution procedures are cited from previous studies. Then the approach is implemented in the biggest electric motor manufacturer in Turkey which has a large number of buyers in household appliances sector, and it is shown to be a useful tool for developing fair partnership.     

Information leakage and supply chain contracts

This paper investigates information leakage under different contract configurations in a supply chain. We consider two competing retailers, one of whom (incumbent) has private information about market demand while the other (entrant) has no access to acquire any market demand information. We assume that the supplier is the leader who may choose a wholesale price contract (WPC) or a revenue-sharing contract (RSC) with each retailer independently. We explore the effect of the supplier's and incumbent's incentives on non-leakage equilibrium and find out that there exists a non-leakage equilibrium only when the incumbent signs an RSC with the supplier under an appropriately given revenue-sharing rate in situations of high demand variation.     

双边不确定性条件下制造商质量投资与零售商销售努力决策

已有研究较少同时考察供应链中制造商产品质量信号传递和零售商销售努力调整的问题。本文考虑零售商通过努力水平改变市场需求,且制造商分摊一定比例销售努力成本的情形,制造商在决定进行质量投资后,双方对制造商能否成为高质量类型各有不同的信念,零售商只能通过观察制造商提供的契约来修正关于制造商类型的信念,并确定产品销售价格与销售努力水平。构建博弈模型分析了双方的质量投资决策、销售努力决策、定价决策以及成本分摊比例。结果表明,在不考虑质量投资成本的情形下,制造商的质量投资能够达到帕累托最优。为了激励零售商付出最优促销努力水平,销售契约中规定销售成本分摊比例与惩罚措施,由于讨价还价的存在,实际的销售成本分摊比例小于对制造商最有利的成本分摊比例。对零售商而言,制造商承担的销售成本分摊比例并非越高越好,这意味着如果超过一定范围,制造商的成本分摊反而会损害零售商的利益。     

Interorganizational Collaborative Forecasting and Replenishment Systems and Supply Chain Implications

Collaborative Forecasting and Replenishment (CFAR) is a new interorganizational system that enables retailers and manufacturers to forecast demand and schedule production jointly. The capabilities of CFAR exceed those of the traditional EDI because CFAR allows exchange of complex decision support models and manufacturer/retailer strategies. The proponents of CFAR claim that the fastest way for retailers and manufacturers to slash inventory costs and product shortages is by coordinating their decisions. The impact of CFAR on the supply chain using a model consisting of a manufacturer selling its product through two independent identical retailers is analyzed. The model assumes that the manufacturer doesn't face capacity constraints, the demand is stationary, and retailer prices are constant over time; the shortages are backordered at the manufacturer and retailers to isolate the effects of information sharing in CFAR. The most significant findings relate to the increase in the cost incurred by the nonparticipant in CFAR, the increase in the manufacturer's cost of serving the nonparticipant if the participant can obtain delivery guarantees in return for demand information sharing, and the incentives of the players to move towards universal retailer participation in CFAR. The findings are explained using the risk structure faced by the players in the supply chain. The managerial implications of the impact of CFAR on the supply chain structure are also discussed.     

Supply Chain Sourcing Under Asymmetric Information

We study a supply chain with two suppliers competing over a contract to supply components to a manufacturer. One of the suppliers is a big company for whom the manufacturer's business constitutes a small part of his business. The other supplier is a small company for whom the manufacturer's business constitutes a large portion of his business. We analyze the problem from the perspective of the big supplier and address the following questions: What is the optimal contracting strategy that the big supplier should follow? How does the information about the small supplier's production cost affect the profits and contracting decision? How does the existence of the small supplier affect profits? By studying various information scenarios regarding the small supplier's and the manufacturer's production cost, we show, for example, that the big supplier benefits when the small supplier keeps its production cost private. We quantify the value of information for the big supplier and the manufacturer. We also quantify the cost (value) of the alternative‐sourcing option for the big supplier (the manufacturer). We determine when an alternative‐sourcing option has more impact on profits than information. We conclude with extensions and numerical examples to shed light on how system parameters affect this supply chain.     

信息不对称下价格随机的应急数量折扣契约研究

以市场需求和市场价格随机波动的二级供应链为研究对象,寻找其在信息不对称条件下绩效优化的路径。通过显示原理分别构建生产成本和销售成本信息不对称时应急供应链的数量折扣契约模型,得到最优订货量与最佳批发价策略。通过具体的算例加以验证,分析了信息不对称程度对供应链上成员及整个供应链绩效的影响。研究结果表明：当突发事件造成市场价格随机波动和市场需求变化时,供应链上的跟随者能从隐瞒私人信息中获利。但当市场需求增大时,整个供应链绩效受损,反之则反是。这与以往研究在市场需求随机、市场价格固定和信息不对称条件下的结论迥异。     

基于随机产出与随机需求的农产品供应链风险共担合同

本文采用单位价格补贴的风险共担机制,分析了农产品供应链中随机产出和随机需求下供应商-制造商采取不同的风险共担合同对农资投入、供应商、制造商以及整个供应链的利润的影响。文中的风险共担合同包括风险无共担合同、需求风险共担合同、产出风险共担合同、产出-需求风险共担合同,结合算例,结论得出:需求风险分担可以使供应链利润增加;产出风险分担可以增加供应商的利润收益,而赋予制造商控制供应商农资投入积极性的权利;产出-需求共担合同既能增加供应链及各成员的利润收益,同时还使得双方相互制约、相互协调,促使供应链良好发展。最后,结合非线性补贴的风险分担形式对上述合同的有效性进行了验证,研究表明,不同的补贴形式只在量上对决策存在影响,而本质上的结论并没有变化。     

Coordinating a three level supply chain with flexible return policies

This paper studies the coordination issue of a three level supply chain selling short life cycle products in a single period model. The manufacturer first negotiates the trade contract with the retailer, then with the supplier. We construct the so-called flexible return policy by setting the rules of pricing while postponing the determination of the final contract prices. With return policies between each pair of adjacent firms, unsold products or used modules dissembled from the unsold products are returned level by level from the retailer to the upstream firms and each firm shares in the loss due to the overstock. We show that the three level supply chain can be fully coordinated with appropriate contracts and the total profit of the channel can be allocated with any specified ratios among the firms.     

不对称信息下考虑产能约束的供应链合同设计

本文针对由产能约束品牌制造商和零售商组成的供应链系统,考虑市场上消费者对产品的异质性偏好,以及品牌制造商和零售商之间存在信息不对称,研究品牌制造商最优合同设计与零售商定价策略,考察产能约束与不对称信息对产品定价和供应双方合作的影响。研究发现：受到产能约束的品牌制造商有三种合同策略,即低价合同、固定价格合同以及高价合同等三种合同,在低价合同下品牌制造商可以充分利用其产能约束,而在后两种合同下产品有可能滞销;不对称信息会导致"批发价格+一次性转移支付"合同不能完美协调供应链。当品牌制造商和零售商进行信息共享谈判时,若二者在高价合同下进行合作,则品牌制造商与零售商在一定条件下可以达成信息共享谈判,实现"双赢"。     

公平感对供应链成员定价决策影响的研究

本文研究公平感对由一个供应商和一个零售商组成的二级供应链中的定价决策的影响,其中供应商决定批发价格,零售商在接受供应商批发价格合同之后决定零售价格,市场需求受到零售价格的线性影响.采用管理实验方法得出,首先,供应商的批发价格和零售商的零售价格均分别低于完全理性假设下的均衡解;供应商是利他性的,即,乐于看到零售商收益的增加,并且,供应商认为零售商是完全理性的,即零售商的决策目标是最大化自身收益;然而,零售商却是刻毒性的,即乐于看到供应商收益的减少.其次,批发价格的变异度大于零售价格的,即供应商决策的难度大于零售商的.给管理者的启示是:供应商应考虑零售商的刻毒性的特征,降低批发价格,以提高零售商接受供应商所提批发价格的概率;此外,还应该为供应商提供辅助决策手段,以降低批发价格的变异度,提高决策的准确性     

Differential Pricing for Information Sharing Under Competition

We consider a two‐echelon supply chain with a manufacturer supplying to multiple downstream retailers engaged in differentiated Cournot competition. Each retailer has private information about uncertain demand. The manufacturer is the Stackelberg leader who sets the contract terms with the retailers, and benefits from retailers sharing their private information. When all retailers are given the same wholesale price, truthful information sharing is not an equilibrium outcome. We propose two variants of differential pricing mechanisms that induce truthful information sharing by all retailers. The first variant rewards a retailer for providing optimistic information and achieves truthful information sharing as a unique equilibrium. The differential pricing mechanism is optimal in the class of linear‐price, incentive‐compatible, direct mechanisms. The second variant, which incorporates provision for a fixed payment in addition to wholesale prices, preserves all the equilibrium properties of the first variant and additionally “nearly coordinates” the supply chain. Our analysis of differential pricing with a fixed payment provides interesting observations regarding the relationship between product substitutability, number of retailers, information precision, and market power. As products become closer substitutes and/or number of retailers increase, the manufacturer's market power increases, enabling her to extract a larger fraction of the supply chain surplus.     

Coordinating a Supply Chain When Facing Strategic Consumers

This article examines the impact of strategic consumers on the efficiency and coordination of a supply chain. We consider a supply chain consisting of a manufacturer and a newsvendor retailer selling a seasonal product to strategic consumers, who may choose to wait for clearance sales to maximize their intertemporal utility. Under a prenegotiated supply contract, the retailer chooses retail price and ordering quantity simultaneously. After that, the strategic consumers, who may be heterogeneous in their patience levels, make purchasing decisions. We find that strategic consumer behavior can hurt the supply chain efficiency due to severe double marginalization, and that a simple buyback contract can coordinate the supply chain. Nevertheless, we show that the supply chain does become more difficult to coordinate when strategic consumers are present: the set of buyback contractual terms that coordinate the chain shrinks as consumers are more willing to wait, and the chain profit cannot be arbitrarily allocated between the firms. Contrary to popular intuition, this result implies that the retailer may enjoy some benefit from consumers' strategic waiting. In addition, we find that the retailer's gain is the highest when impatient and patient consumers are comparably mixed in the population.      

考虑异质消费者的线下到线上供应链合作广告契约设计

本文针对一个拥有线上渠道的制造商和一个零售商组成的线下到线上(O2O)供应链,考虑渠道产品差异化策略下零售商为制造商线上渠道进行广告引流,刻画消费者对产品的异质性需求,分别设计对称信息和不对称信息下制造商的最优合作广告契约,通过对比两种情形中最优决策及利润的变化分析信息不对称的影响,并进一步探讨不对称信息下消费者渠道转换的麻烦成本、单位不匹配成本等重要参数对合作广告契约设计和供应链成员利润的影响。研究发现:不对称信息下,制造商可以策略性选择三种不同策略以最大化自身利润,其中不甄别零售商真实信息的混同均衡在某些条件下是制造商的最优策略;尽管信息不对称会给制造商带来利润损失,但制造商通过策略选择可缓和信息不对称的不利影响,某些条件下信息不对称并不损害供应链总体的利润;麻烦成本的变化会改变制造商不对称信息下最优合作广告契约的策略选择,某些条件下麻烦成本的增高对制造商利润反而存在正影响。最后,通过数值仿真对上述研究结果进行直观考察和说明。     

回馈与惩罚契约下闭环供应链应对突发事件的协调性研究

考虑一个制造商和一个零售商组成的闭环供应链,在考虑随机性需求下,首先分析了回馈与惩罚契约对闭环供应链的协调作用;然后,探讨了回馈与惩罚契约对突发事件的协调作用,研究表明:基准的回馈与惩罚契约对突发事件将不再发挥协调作用,为此,给出了闭环供应链对突发事件的最优应对策略,并调整了原来的回馈与惩罚契约使其具有抗突发事件性。