Competition and Coordination in a Two‐Channel Supply Chain

We study competition and coordination in a supply chain in which a single supplier both operates a direct channel and sells its product through multiple differentiated retailers. We study analytically the supply chain with symmetric retailers and find that the supplier prefers to have as many retailers as possible in the market, even if the retailers' equilibrium retail price is lower than that of the supplier, and even if the number of retailers and their cost or market advantage prevent sales through the direct channel. We find that the two‐channel supply chain may be subject to inefficiencies not present in the single‐channel supply chain. We show that several contracts known to coordinate a single‐channel supply chain do not coordinate the two‐channel supply chain; thus we propose a linear quantity discount contract and demonstrate its ability to perfectly coordinate the two‐channel supply chain with symmetric retailers. We provide some analytical results for the supply chain with asymmetric retailers and propose an efficient solution approach for finding the equilibrium. We find numerically that the supplier still benefits from having more retailers in the market and that linear quantity discount contracts can mitigate supply chain inefficiency, though they no longer achieve perfect coordination.     

Push and Pull Contracts in a Local Supply Chain with an Outside Market*

Wholesale price contracts are widely studied in a single supplier‐single retailer supply chain, but without considering an outside market where the supplier may sell if he gets a high enough price and the retailer may buy if the price is low enough. We fill this gap in the literature by studying push and pull contracts in a local supplier–retailer supply chain with the presence of an outside market. Taking the local supplier's maximum production capacity and the outside market barriers into account, we identify the Pareto set of the push and/or pull contracts and draw managerial implications. The main results include the following. First, the most inefficient point of the pull Pareto set cannot always be removed by considering both the push and pull contracts. Second, the supplier's production capacity plays a significant role in the presence of an outside market; it affects the supplier's negotiating power with the retailer and the coordination of the supply chain can be accomplished only with a large enough capacity. Third, the import and export barriers influence the supply chain significantly: (i) an export barrier in the local market and the supplier's production capacity influence the supplier's export strategy; (ii) a low import (resp., export) barrier in the local market can improve the local supply chain's efficiency by use of a push (resp., pull) contract; and (iii) a high import (resp., export) barrier in the local market encourages the supplier (resp., retailer) to bear more inventory risk.     

考虑无缺陷退货下零售商转运的供应链回购契约研究

针对由单个供应商和同一连锁企业的两个零售商组成的供应链系统中无缺陷退货问题。在随机需求下,假设零售商努力水平与无缺陷退货率成反比,以及两个零售商之间可以相互进行库存转运,建立了期望收益决策模型。通过比较集中决策和分散决策下零售商订货量及各方期望利润,确定了零售商最优订货量和最优努力水平,并提出了改进的差异化回购契约,算例分析表明,改进的差异化回购契约能够达到供应链协调。     

Coordination in a Single‐Supplier,Multi‐Retailer Distribution System: Supplier‐Facilitated Transshipments

We consider supplier‐facilitated transshipments for achieving supply chain coordination in a single supplier, multi‐retailer distribution system with non‐cooperative retailers. The previous transshipment literature has focused on coordination through retailer‐negotiated transshipments and thus does not consider the supplier's decision‐making. In contrast, in this study, we assume the supplier is an active participant in the system and we seek to understand how the supplier can facilitate the implementation of coordinating transshipments. We study a two‐period model with wholesale orders at the start of the first period and preventive transshipments performed at the start of the second period. Inspired by a supplier‐facilitated transshipment scheme observed in practice, we assume the supplier implements transshipments through a bi‐directional adjustment contract. Under this contract, each retailer can either buy additional inventory from, or sell back excess inventory to, the supplier. We show that coordination can be achieved through carefully designed contracts with state‐dependent adjustment prices and a wholesale price menu. We demonstrate that the supplier's role in facilitating coordinating transshipments is critical. In addition, we use our understanding of the coordinating contract form to derive some simpler and easier‐to‐implement heuristic contracts. We use a numerical study to demonstrate the value, to the supplier, of using the coordinating adjustment and wholesale prices, and to evaluate the heuristics’ performance.     

Coordinating a Supply Chain System with Retailers Under Both Price and Inventory Competition

We investigate a supply chain system with a common supplier selling to downstream retailers who are engaged in both price and inventory competition. We establish the existence and uniqueness of the pure‐strategy Nash equilibrium for the retailer game and study how a supplier can coordinate the system to achieve the best performance. Our main conclusions are as follows: First, a buyback contract can be used to coordinate retailers competing on both price and inventory in a sense that optimal retail prices and inventory levels arise as the Pareto‐dominant equilibrium. With symmetric retailers, the system optimum arises as the unique symmetric equilibrium. Second, the particular type of competition experienced by retailers (price versus inventory competition) affects the characteristics of the contract. Specifically, strong price competition leads to a coordination mechanism with a positive buyback rate, where the supplier subsidizes retailers for leftover inventories; however, strong inventory competition leads to a negative buyback rate, where retailers are punished for overstocking. Using a linear expected demand function, we further explore the impact of system parameters on the coordination contract and the competitive equilibrium. We also find that the performance of the supplier's optimal contract is asymptotic to the system optimal coordination contract as competition becomes fierce.     

Allocating Capacity with Demand Competition: Fixed Factor Allocation*

We consider a supply chain consisting of a supplier and two retailers. The supplier sells a single product to the retailers, who, in turn, retail the product to customers. The supplier has limited production capacity, and the retailers compete for the supplier's capacity and are duopolists engaged in Cournot competition for their customers. When the sum of the retailers' orders exceeds the supplier's capacity, the supplier allocates his capacity according to a preannounced allocation rule. We propose a new capacity allocation rule, fixed factor allocation, which incorporates the ideas of proportional and lexicographic allocations: it prioritizes retailers as in lexicographic allocation, but guarantees only a fixed proportion of the total available capacity to the prioritized retailer. We show that (1) the fixed factor allocation rule incorporates lexicographic and proportional allocations from the perspectives of the supplier and the supply chain; (2) under fixed factor allocation, the supply chain profit is not affected by the allocation factor when it is greater than a threshold; (3) the retailers share the supply chain profit with the supplier depending on the value of the allocation factor; and (4) the fixed factor allocation coordinates the supply chain when the market size is sufficiently large. We also compare fixed factor with proportional and lexicographic allocations, respectively. Furthermore, we demonstrate how the supplier can optimize his capacity level and wholesale price under fixed factor allocation.     

VMI供应链下考虑补货策略的的契约设计

结合(r,Q)和(s,S)两种库存补货策略,提出了货权属供应商的VMI供应链的契约设计问题。采用风险分担的思想,给出了两种可行的风险分担的契约形式。在离散需求下,通过参数试验的形式,分别研究了两种契约形式对供应链效率的影响。研究结果表明,两种契约能够使得供应链的效率达到满意,同时对于影响效率的参数有一定的鲁棒性,并且在一定情况下能协调供应链。相比收益分享契约,引入风险分享的契约形式能够使得供应链协作的效率更高。研究结论对VMI契约设计有参考意义。     

Discount Pricing Policies and the Coordination of Decentralized Distribution Systems*

A challenge of supply chain management is to align the objectives, and hence coordinate the activities, of independent supply chain members. In this study, we approach this problem in a simple way by extending traditional quantity discounts that are based solely on buyers' individual order size to discount policies that are based on both buyers' individual order size and their annual volume. We show that discount policies are able to achieve nearly optimal system profit and, hence, provide effective coordination, for a decentralized two‐echelon distribution system, whereby a supplier sells a product to a group of heterogeneous and independent retailers each facing a downward‐sloping demand curve of its retail price. When buyers are heterogeneous, a critical issue of coordination is to motivate different customers to increase their demand and lot size according to their potential so as to improve profits. We show that market heterogeneity presents an effective discriminating factor for the supplier to segment customers in the design of a coordination mechanism.     

Pay‐Back‐Revenue‐Sharing Contract in Coordinating Supply Chains with Random Yield

We consider coordination issues in supply chains where supplier's production process is subject to random yield losses. For a simple supply chain with a single supplier and retailer facing deterministic demand, a pay back contract which has the retailer paying a discount price for the supplier's excess units can provide the right incentive for the supplier to increase his production size and achieve coordination. Building upon this result, we consider coordination issues for two other supply chains: one with competing retailers, the other with stochastic demand. When retailers compete for both demand and supply, they tend to over‐order. We show that a combination of a pay back and revenue sharing mechanism can coordinate the supply chain, with the pay back mechanism correcting the supplier's under‐producing problem and the revenue sharing mechanism correcting the retailers' over‐ordering problem. When demand is stochastic, we consider a modified pay‐back‐revenue‐sharing contract under which the retailer agrees to not only purchase the supplier's excess output (beyond the retailer's order), but also share with the supplier a portion of the revenue made from the sales of the excess output. We show that this contract, by giving the supplier additional incentives in the form of revenue share, can achieve coordination.     

Supply chain coordination with information design

We consider the coordination of a supplier–retailer supply chain where, in addition to classical contract considerations, a supplier decides the adoption of an information structure (IS) for the supply chain, with a higher-quality IS allowing the supply chain parties to obtain a more accurate demand forecast. Because a wholesale price contract cannot coordinate the supply chain due to misaligned incentives of supply chain parties, we explore what common coordinating contracts in the classical coordination literature can continue coordinating the supply chain with the IS adoption. Interestingly, our analysis appears to reveal the power of simplicity: some simple classical coordinating contracts (e.g., the buy-back and revenue-sharing contracts), though not designed with the IS consideration, still coordinate the supply chain, whereas other more complicated classical contracts (e.g., the quantity flexibility and sales rebate contracts) fail to do so. We derive a general condition for supply chain coordination and show that any contract with a newsvendor-like transfer payment can coordinate the supply chain.     

Channel Strategies and Stocking Policies in Uncapacitated and Capacitated Supply Chains*

A supply chain consisting of a single supplier distributing two independent products through multiple retailers is analyzed in this paper. The supplier needs to incentivize its retailers to adopt stocking policies that are mutually advantageous and that result in the optimal level of market coverage. The focus is on determining the optimal stocking policies for retailers and the resulting distribution strategy given that the supplier has either unlimited or limited capacity. The results provide insights on the optimal distribution strategy and stocking policies for the supply chain. In general, the paper shows that it is optimal for the supplier to use an intensive distribution strategy (i.e., the products are stocked by all retailers). Selective or exclusive strategies are optimal only when retailers are risk averse, stocking synergies exist, and there are differences in demand or supply uncertainties across products. The analysis also shows that retailers hold larger stocks of a product which generates higher supplier margins but only when the supplier has unlimited capacity. If the supplier has limited capacity, then their margins have no effect on retailers' stocking decisions. Contrary to conventional wisdom, retailers hold larger stocks of a product that has less demand uncertainty as compared to one that has more demand uncertainty.     

Coordinating contracts for a financially constrained supply chain

We consider a financially constrained supply chain in which a supplier (leader) sells products to a retailer (follower) who has no access to bank financing due to her low credit rating. However, the supplier can borrow from a bank and offer trade credit to the retailer to alleviate her financial constraint. Failure to pay off a bank loan or trade credit incurs a variable default cost. We analyze the centralized version of the supply chain to obtain new coordination requirements. We then examine whether revenue-sharing, buyback, and all-unit quantity discount contracts can coordinate our supply chain. We show that the all-unit quantity discount contract fails to coordinate. However, the revenue-sharing and buyback contracts can coordinate the supply chain, but only when the supply chain has a sufficient total working capital. Moreover, they cannot allocate profit flexibly unless the supplier has a large enough working capital. Finally, we design a generalized revenue-sharing contract that coordinates the supply chain with flexible profit allocation, and also show by numerical examples its superiority over the revenue-sharing and buyback contracts.     

Hierarchical Screening for Capacity Allocation in Supply Chains: The Role of Distributors

We consider a two‐stage principal–agent screening environment in a decentralized supply chain with retailers, distributors, and a supplier. The retailers possess private information regarding their local market profitabilities. The distributors can partially observe the retailers' profitabilities and are heterogeneous with regard to the precision of that information. The supplier determines the level of production, but knows neither the local market profitabilities nor the precision of the distributors' information. The supplier first allocates finished products to distributors, and the distributors then contract with local retailers with a capacity constraint. We find that due to the distributors' superior information, the quantity distortion on the retailers' side is mitigated, and the upstream information asymmetry subsequently affects the quantity allocation among the downstream retailers. The supplier may not benefit from contracting with the distributors. In addition, no distributor is excluded based on the heterogeneity of the information precision, even though some distributors do not have better information than the supplier. In the numerical examples, we further analyze how the local market heterogeneity and inventory costs affect the capacity allocation, the retailers' payoffs, and the supply chain profits. We document some counter‐intuitive quantity allocation rules that arise from the distributors' information advantage.     

服务质量影响市场需求下资金约束型网购供应链协调研究

高质量发展服务业已经写入国家战略，其重要性在以顾客需求为导向的网购市场经济中尤为突出。企业服务质量直接决定顾客的购物体验。在供应链意图改善顾客体验但零售商受资金约束的背景下，考虑服务质量对市场需求的影响，设计回购契约与"基于目标销售量的信用契约"组合，构建资金约束型网购供应链协调决策模型，并对其进行求解以获得供应链最优经营策略。研究结果显示，运用最优策略不仅有助于缓解零售商的资金压力，而且能激励其提高服务质量，改善顾客购物体验；所得契约设计不仅能实现网购供应链协调，而且能实现供应链总利润在节点企业之间的任意分配，提高了契约的操作性，保障了最优策略的有效性。     

库存成本变化的VMI供应链协调

提出了库存成本变化的经济订货批量(EOQ)模型，基于该模型研究了库存成本变化时供应商管理库存(VMI)系统的最优协议问题。在该系统中，订货商和供应商达成缺货成本共担协议：当缺货发生时，供应商需要向订货商支付缺货补偿。订货商和供应商分散决策，订货商通过设计协议来减少其成本，而供应商通过制定补货决策来缩小自身成本。通过与传统系统和整合系统的比较，得出了库存成本变化时VMI系统的最优补货决策和缺货成本共担协议。采用数值算例验证了分析结果。结果表明，当且仅当供应商预期成本等于整合系统的最小总成本与固定缺货罚金之和时，VMI系统与整合系统具有相同的补货决策和系统绩效，即能够实现供应链协调。     

Coordinated responsiveness for volatile toy supply chains

Demands for innovative products in short selling windows are highly unpredictable. This volatility creates demands with dramatic peaks and troughs due to risk-avoidance behaviours among manufacturers and retailers. The consequences are high obsolete inventory, lost sales, and markdowns. Theoretically, the concepts of quick response and postponement are among the potential solutions for such as a volatile and seasonal toy supply chain. This study explores the role of responsiveness and coordination in improving supply chain performance. It is based on an in-depth case study in a European toy supply chain. Consumer and retailer demand patterns and their implications to the manufacturer's supply chains are analysed. Opportunities for relocating order penetration points (OPP) and quick response are simulated, and appropriate relocation rules are established. It is concluded that OPP relocation and responsiveness are beneficial but inadequate in improving the supply chain. Coordination of ordering behaviours is necessary. Coordination processes to achieve greater performance between the toy manufacturer and two of its retailers are presented. Furthermore, the concept of ‘coordinated responsiveness’ is proposed, which combines the concepts of quick response, accurate response and coordination.     

Uniform vs. Retailer‐Specific Pricing: Incentive Alignment to Enhance Supply Chain Efficiency

We consider a supplier selling to multiple retailers using one of two constant wholesale pricing strategies: a uniform wholesale price (UWP) vs. a retailer‐specific wholesale price (RSWP). In line with the prior literature in economics, our initial finding is that as long as retailers are asymmetric, then (a) the supplier and less efficient retailer would prefer the RSWP strategy and (b) the more efficient retailer would prefer the UWP strategy. By examining the total profits of the supply chain under each pricing strategy, we present a new result: the UWP strategy results in a greater degree of supply chain efficiency as compared to the RSWP strategy. The key intuition driving this result is that by charging a UWP, the supplier signals a fair treatment for downstream retailers, which leads to the more efficient retailer being able to reduce market prices and hence capture a larger share of market demand. Noting that the supplier prefers the RSWP scheme as compared to the UWP scheme, we propose a contract which comprises two components: a UWP per unit complemented with a slotting allowance or side payment. The contract is always preferred by the supplier and also leads to greater supply chain efficiency.     

The Impact of Forecast Errors on Early Order Commitment in a Supply Chain*

Supply chain partnership involves mutual commitments among participating firms. One example is early order commitment, wherein a retailer commits to purchase a fixed‐order quantity and delivery time from a supplier before the real need takes place. This paper explores the value of practicing early order commitment in the supply chain. We investigate the complex interactions between early order commitment and forecast errors by simulating a supply chain with one capacitated supplier and multiple retailers under demand uncertainty. We found that practicing early order commitment can generate significant savings in the supply chain, but the benefits are only valid within a range of order commitment periods. Different components of forecast errors have different cost implications to the supplier and the retailers. The presence of trend in the demand increases the total supply chain cost, but makes early order commitment more appealing. The more retailers sharing the same supplier, the more valuable for the supply chain to practice early order commitment. Except in cases where little capacity cushion is available, our findings are relatively consistent in the environments where cost structure, number of retailers, capacity utilization, and capacity policy are varied.     

风险规避型供应链的收益共享机制研究

探讨了由风险规避型零售商与风险规避型供应商组成的两级供应链协作激励问题.首先研究了Stackelberg主从对策模型下风险规避型零售商与风险规避型供应商的决策行为,并分析了双方的风险规避系数对双方决策行为的影响.然后,研究了垂直一体化模型下风险规避型供应链的决策行为,同样分析了双方风险规避系数对供应链决策行为的影响程度.最后,提出采用收益共享契约机制来协调该供应链.并通过数值实验进一步分析供应商与零售商的风险规避系数对双方的决策行为及收益共享系数的影响程度.     

Supply Chain Coordination in the Presence of Gray Markets and Strategic Consumers

The practice of diverting genuine products to unauthorized gray markets continues to challenge companies in various industries and creates intense competition for authorized channels. Recent industry surveys report that the abuse of channel incentives is a primary reason for the growth of gray market activities. Therefore, it is crucial that companies take the presence of gray markets into consideration when they design contracts to distribute products through authorized retailers. This issue has received little attention in the extensive literature on contracting and supply chain coordination. In this study, we analyze the impacts of gray markets on two classic contracts, wholesale price and quantity discount, in a supply chain with one manufacturer and one retailer when the retailer has the opportunity to sell to a domestic gray market. Our analysis provides interesting and counterintuitive results. First, a classic quantity‐discount contract that normally coordinates the supply chain can perform so poorly in the presence of a gray market that the supply chain would be better off using a wholesale price contract instead. Second, the presence of gray market can also degrade the performance of the wholesale price contract; therefore, a more sophisticated contract is needed for coordinating the supply chain. We show that contracts that solely depend on retailer's order quantity cannot coordinate the supply chain, and provide the conditions for coordinating the supply chain with price‐dependent quantity discount contracts. We also provide comparative statics and show that when there is a gray market, coordinating the supply chain enhances total consumer welfare.