需求扰动下闭环供应链的收益费用共享契约研究

本文研究了由一个制造商和一个零售商组成的零售商负责回收闭环供应链。指出通过收益费用共享契约可协调解决分散式决策闭环供应链中存在的“双边际效应”问题,提高其运营效益。当突发事件引起市场需求中的最大市场需求规模发生扰动时,通过对集中式决策闭环供应链的最优决策与稳定环境下起协调作用的收益费用共享契约协调零售商所得到的最优决策进行比较分析,结果表明：稳定环境下的收益费用共享契约将不能协调突发事件干扰下的分散式决策闭环供应链。基于收益费用共享契约的协调机理对其参数进行改进可再次协调突发事件干扰下的分散式决策闭环供应链,并且该契约也能够协调稳定环境下的分散式决策闭环供应链。最后,通过算例验证了本文的主要结论并说明了收益费用共享契约的价值。     

Dynamic Pricing,Production, and Channel Coordination with Stochastic Learning

We consider a decentralized two‐period supply chain in which a manufacturer produces a product with benefits of cost learning, and sells it through a retailer facing a price‐dependent demand. The manufacturer's second‐period production cost declines linearly in the first‐period production, but with a random learning rate. The manufacturer may or may not have the inventory carryover option. We formulate the resulting problems as two‐period Stackelberg games and obtain their feedback equilibrium solutions explicitly. We then examine the impact of mean learning rate and learning rate variability on the pricing strategies of the channel members, on the manufacturer's production decisions, and on the retailer's procurement decisions. We show that as the mean learning rate or the learning rate variability increases, the traditional double marginalization problem becomes more severe, leading to greater efficiency loss in the channel. We obtain revenue sharing contracts that can coordinate the dynamic supply chain. In particular, when the manufacturer may hold inventory, we identify two major drivers for inventory carryover: market growth and learning rate variability. Finally, we demonstrate the robustness of our results by examining a model in which cost learning takes place continuously.     

Demand Forecast Sharing in Supply Chains

This paper examines the incentives of a manufacturer and a retailer to share their demand forecasts. The demand at the retailer is a linearly decreasing function of price. The manufacturer sets the wholesale price first, and the retailer sets the retail price after observing the wholesale price. Both players set their prices based on their forecasts of demand. In the make‐to‐order scenario, the manufacturer sets the production quantity after observing the actual demand; in the make‐to‐stock scenario, the manufacturer sets the production quantity before the demand is realized. In the make‐to‐order scenario, we show that sharing the forecast unconditionally by the retailer with the manufacturer benefits the manufacturer but hurts the retailer. We also demonstrate that a side payment contract cannot induce Pareto‐optimal information sharing equilibrium, but a discount based wholesale price contract can. The social welfare as well as consumer surplus is higher under the discount contract, compared with under no information sharing. In the make‐to‐stock scenario, the manufacturer realizes additional benefits in the form of savings in inventory holding and shortage costs when forecasts are shared. If the savings from inventory holding and shortage costs because of information sharing are sufficiently high, then a side payment contract that induces Pareto‐optimal information sharing is feasible in the make‐to‐stock scenario. We also provide additional managerial insights with the help of a computational study.     

需求扰动下生产规模不经济闭环供应链的应急渠道决策

针对生产规模不经济闭环供应链，在突发事件干扰其产品的市场需求发生扰动的情况下，比较研究了各类回收渠道分散式决策系统和集中式决策系统的应急均衡决策及契约协调问题。结果表明：当需求的扰动程度不大时，各类系统正常运营环境下新产品的订购量和废旧品的回收量等均衡决策均具鲁棒性，当需求的扰动程度较大时，各类系统均应按其扰动方向调整正常运营环境下制定的均衡决策；制造商回收渠道分散式决策系统中其获得的利润和系统的总利润均高于零售商回收渠道分散式决策系统的，且制造商会利用更高比例的废旧品生产再造品，因此其应直接回收废旧品；各企业的利润和系统的总利润均随生产规模不经济弹性系数的增加而降低；设计的应急收益费用共享契约可协调解决各类回收渠道分散式决策系统中存在的"双重边际效应"问题，且各企业可通过讨价还价确定收益费用共享比例的取值来获得帕累托改进的利润。     

Life‐Cycle Channel Coordination Issues in Launching an Innovative Durable Product

We analyze the dynamic strategic interactions between a manufacturer and a retailer in a decentralized distribution channel used to launch an innovative durable product (IDP). The underlying retail demand for the IDP is influenced by word‐of‐mouth from past adopters and follows a Bass‐type diffusion process. The word‐of‐mouth influence creates a trade‐off between immediate and future sales and profits, resulting in a multi‐period dynamic supply chain coordination problem. Our analysis shows that while in some environments, the manufacturer is better off with a far‐sighted retailer, there are also environments in which the manufacturer is better off with a myopic retailer. We characterize equilibrium dynamic pricing strategies and the resulting sales and profit trajectories. We demonstrate that revenue‐sharing contracts can coordinate the IDP's supply chain with both far‐sighted and myopic retailers throughout the entire planning horizon and arbitrarily allocate the channel profit.     

信息不对称对闭环供应链MTO和MTS模式的影响研究

在MTO(按订单生产)和MTS(按库存生产)两种模式下,比对了信息不对称和信息共享下产品定价、废旧品回收率和零售商利润的区别,研究结果显示:(1) 产品定价、废旧品回收率和零售商利润不受生产模式改变的影响;(2) 在某些条件下,信息共享下产品的批发价、零售价、和废旧品回收率均高于信息不对称时的相应值,进行信息共享会增加闭环供应链的总体利润,但零售商有可能通过信息共享丧失信息优势,从而使得其利润受损。因此为了促使零售商参与信息共享,信息共享参与方应投资建立安全的通信系统,以保证共享信息不被泄露。另外本文通过引入纳什讨价还价模型建立了一个公平的利润划拨机制,该机制使得最后的利润划分只取决于各参与方的议价能力,与各参与方对通信系统投资大小无关。     

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.     

Does a Store Brand Always Hurt the Manufacturer of a Competing National Brand?

It is generally believed that store brands hurt the manufacturers of competing national brands while benefiting retailers. In this study, we challenge this notion by studying the impacts of a store brand when it is introduced by a power retailer. We show that a store brand may benefit the manufacturer when the interaction between the manufacturer and retailer is modeled as a retailer‐led Stackelberg game. This phenomenon occurs because the store brand changes the nature of the strategic interaction between the manufacturer and retailer in our model. In particular, while the interaction is always vertical strategic substitutability without a store brand, it may become vertical strategic independence with one. With the store brand, the demand for the national brand becomes larger, and the wholesale price for the national brand may increase, both of which benefit the manufacturer. Finally, the store brand may lessen the double marginalization problem of the supply chain for the national brand in the retailer‐led Stackelberg game, but does so in an unconventional way: The reduction in the double marginalization effect may come from a lowered retail markup instead of a lowered wholesale price. Our results reconcile some discrepancies between theoretical predictions and empirical findings regarding the impacts of store brands on manufacturers.     

基于电子市场的供应链双渠道冲突与协调的契约设计

研究了一个制造商通过传统零售渠道销售产品的同时开辟网上直销渠道,采取混合双渠道来销售产品的供应链渠道结构。从分析消费者效用出发,建立了双渠道环境下需求依赖价格变化的需求函数,运用博弈论建立决策模型。结果表明制造商在保持传统渠道的同时,开辟电子渠道将导致传统零售商的市场份额减少,利润降低,引起渠道冲突。为了解决混合双渠道的冲突和协调,设计了批发价加电子渠道价格的合同实现了双渠道供应链的协调,通过改进的收入共享契约不但实现了双渠道供应链的协调,而且实现了开辟电子渠道后供应链各成员利润的帕累托改进,从而实现了供应链双渠道冲突的协调问题。     

Category Captainship vs. Retailer Category Management under Limited Retail Shelf Space

Shelf‐space scarcity is a predominant aspect of the consumer goods industry. This paper analyzes its implications for category management. We consider a model where two competing manufacturers sell their differentiated products through a single retailer who determines the shelf space allocated to the category. The scope of category management is pricing. We consider two category management mechanisms: retailer category management (RCM), where the retailer determines product prices and category captainship (CC), where a manufacturer in the category determines them. Our analysis reveals that the retailer can use the form of category management and the category shelf space to control the intensity of competition between manufacturers to his benefit. We also show that the emergence of CC depends on the degree of product differentiation, the opportunity cost of shelf space, and the profit sharing arrangement in the alliance. The equilibrium category shelf space under CC may be higher than under RCM if the value to the retailer of eliminating double marginalization and putting price pressure on the non‐captain manufacturer dominates the loss from sharing the profit with the category captain. CC has been criticized for disadvantaging non‐captain manufacturers. While we provide some support for this claim, we also find that CC may benefit non‐captain manufacturers when implemented by a powerful retailer in categories with sufficiently differentiated products, because the shelf space allocated to the category increases in this case.     

预测信息分享对制造商开通直销渠道的影响

研究了零售商预测信息分享对制造商渠道结构选择的影响.运用不完全信息动态博弈分别建立了单渠道和双渠道供应链决策模型,得到了贝叶斯均衡的渠道价格和各方最优期望利润.研究发现当零售商的需求预测精度比较低时,制造商应当开通直销渠道.零售商没有动机将预测信息与制造商分享.设计了一个信息分享补偿机制使得零售商能自愿分享其私有信息.在信息分享补偿机制下,虽然制造商为获取零售商预测信息付出了成本,但是依然有动机开通直销渠道.     

基于改进收益共享契约的双渠道供应链协调研究

在需求具有价格敏感性条件下,结合双渠道供应链的特点,研究了双渠道供应链中的两种协调方式,即传统分销渠道与电子直销渠道之间的协调及上下游节点之间的协调。首先,制造商将电子直销渠道所得收益按一定比例分享给零售商。其次,制造商提供给零售商一个较低的批发价格,而零售商将其在传统分销渠道的收益按一定比例分享给制造商作为补偿。从而构建了能够实现双渠道供应链协调的收益共享契约模型,给出了实现双渠道供应链协调时,契约参数取值范围的计算公式,并进一步探讨了双渠道供应链完美共赢协调存在的条件。最后通过算例分析,验证了所设计的收益共享契约模型对双渠道供应链协调的有效性。     

互补品制造供应链的集团采购与需求信息共享

研究了集团采购中信息共享的激励问题.考虑两个互补品制造商通过一个集团采购组织(group purchasing organization,GPO)集中采购某种部件,制造商分别观测到不完美需求预测信息,并可选择向GPO共享任意水平信息量.通过建立不完全信息下的动态博弈模型和求解博弈均衡,分析互补性、信息精度和信息共享水平等因素对于系统绩效的影响,揭示制造商的信息共享激励问题,进而设计基于收益共享契约的信息共享激励机制.研究发现,批发价格契约下,各制造商不愿共享任何信息,信息共享会加剧双重边际效应,削弱互补效应和预测效应,从而降低系统利润;收益共享契约下,各制造商愿意共享全部信息,且所有参与者实现帕累托改进,而进一步消除制造商间的信息不对称可使系统达到最优.     

不确定性环境下不同补货策略的供应链契约协调研究

针对产出和需求不确定性导致的残值或补货问题,考虑单个制造商和零售商所组成的双边随机供应链,双方采取事前订单形式,构建两种不同现货市场补货策略模型,研究随机环境下最优原材料投入量-成品订货量决策行为及供应链协调。研究表明：零售商自行补货时,收益共享合同不能分担上游产出不确定性风险,制造商为避免产出过剩会减小投入量导致合同失效,但融合了缺货惩罚-余货补偿双向机制的收益共享契约能够进行有效协调。当由制造商补货时,现货市场降低了产出不确定性风险且提高了系统产出投入比,并能重新使收益共享契约生效。此外,有效契约协调后的各方收益均为系统最优收益的仿射函数,并由协商后的收益共享比例控制着分配系数。理论分析和数值仿真说明了合同协调的有效性。算例分析还发现,设计的收益共享风险共担契约相比单一的收益共享契约能够更好地降低不确定性对收益的影响。     

制造商成本削减策略对风险规避型零售商信息共享策略的影响

考虑一个风险中性制造商和一个风险规避零售商构成的供应链，需求随机且受销售价格的影响。在销售季节之前，零售商对需求进行预测，获取需求信号；制造商对生产进行投资降低生产成本。基于零售商的不同信息共享策略及制造商的投资策略，考虑四种不同策略模型，分别得到最优零售价、批发价（及投资水平），并分析需求预测精确度对供应链成员决策和效用的影响。通过四种模型效用的对比分析，探讨制造商的投资策略以及零售商的风险规避态度对零售商信息共享策略的影响。研究发现，零售商共享需求信息对于制造商总是有益的，且制造商总是愿意采取成本削减策略；只有当制造商采取成本削减策略，且其投资成本系数较低时，共享需求信息对零售商才有益。最后，得到了制造商和零售商的均衡策略。     

Value of and Interaction between Production Postponement and Information Sharing Strategies for Supply Chain Firms

We analyze the value of and interaction between production postponement and information sharing, which are two distinct strategies to reduce manufacturers’ uncertainty about demand. In both single‐level and two‐level supply chains, from the manufacturer's perspective, while information sharing is always valuable, production postponement can sometimes be detrimental. Furthermore, the value of production postponement is not merely driven by savings in inventory holding cost as postponement enables the manufacturer to avoid both excess and shortfall in production. We find that production postponement and information sharing strategies may substitute, complement, or conflict with each other, depending on the extent of the increase in the unit production cost when production is postponed. In a two‐level supply chain, from the retailer's perspective, information sharing and production postponement can be beneficial or detrimental. When information sharing is beneficial to the retailer, the retailer always shares her demand information with the manufacturer voluntarily. In addition, this voluntary information sharing is truthful because inflated or deflated demand information hurts the retailer through a higher wholesale price or a stock‐out. However, the retailer never shares her demand information voluntarily if the manufacturer has already adopted production postponement because production postponement and information sharing strategies always conflict with each other. Even when the retailer does not benefit from information sharing, we show that the manufacturer can always design an incentive mechanism to induce the retailer to share the demand information, irrespective of whether the manufacturer has already implemented production postponement or not. The above findings underscore the need for a careful assessment of demand uncertainty‐reduction strategies before the supply chain players embark upon them.     

需求不确定下制造商服务投入影响销售的供应链信息共享与激励

针对需求不确定环境下制造商既提供产品也提供相关服务时产品服务供应链中的信息共享与激励问题,考虑零售商拥有需求预测信息且可选择共享任意水平的信息量,通过构建不完全信息下的动态博弈模型,分析了零售商信息共享水平、制造商服务效率以及消费者服务敏感性对服务价值和信息共享价值的影响,并提出了基于两部补偿契约的信息共享激励策略。研究表明：需求信息共享能够有效提升整个供应链的服务价值;当制造商服务效率或者消费者服务敏感性较高时,信息共享的服务改善效应将占优于其双边际效应,零售商会自愿共享全部需求信息并达到供应链"双赢";而当制造商服务效率或者消费者服务敏感性较低时,采用两部补偿激励契约可实现产品服务供应链中的完全信息共享,并且契约实施难度会随着零售商需求预测精度、制造商服务效率以及消费者服务敏感性的提高而降低。     

Controlling Power Retailer's Gray Activities Through Contract Design

We develop a model that captures dynamic relationships of a supply chain populated by a dominant retailer and a number of fringe retailers. The two types of retailers are asymmetric in buying power, retailing cost, and the ability to service the manufacturer's product. The wholesale prices offered through a quantity discount (QD) schedule can coordinate such a supply chain, but invite channel flow diversion type of gray trading between the dominant retailer and the fringe retailers. Our analysis is focused on how such a channel can be coordinated and the gray market activities be prevented. We propose a dynamic QD contract or a revenue‐sharing contract that the manufacturer can use to fight the gray market activity. The performance of the supply chain and the manufacturer's profit under each of the two contract forms are compared and managerial guidelines are provided to help the manufacturer make a judicious choice.     

考虑制造商创新的供应链双向需求信息共享研究

本文考虑制造商创新,研究由一个制造商和一个零售商组成的两级供应链双向需求信息共享问题。制造商与零售商均拥有部分需求信息,且制造商进行成本降低创新,根据逆向分析求解方法分析制造商与零售商在均不共享、制造商单方共享、零售商单方共享、相互共享需求信息情形下的均衡决策,并分别通过求解制造商和零售商的事前利润来探讨制造商与零售商的需求信息共享价值。研究发现：制造商在四种需求信息共享情形下的创新投资增量均与获取的需求信息正相关,而与创新系数负相关。制造商的需求信息共享价值在制造商单方共享和互共享需求信息情形下总为负,在零售商单方共享情形下总为正。零售商的需求信息共享价值随着制造商创新能力的增强由负变正。本文在供应链双向需求信息共享的研究中引入制造商创新,拓展了相关研究,具有一定的理论价值和实践意义。     

网络外部性对双渠道供应链信息分享的影响

研究了网络外部性对双渠道供应链信息分享的影响。分别建立了存在网络外部性和不存在网络外部性下的双渠道供应链模型,通过比较零售商信息分享和不分享下其与制造商的期望利润。研究发现：当未考虑产品的网络外部性时,零售商不与制造商分享其市场需求信息,与已有研究一致。当考虑了产品网络外部性且网络外部性较小时,零售商仍不与制造商分享市场需求信息;然而,当网络外部性较大时,零售商与制造商分享其市场需求信息。此外,零售商与制造商共享其市场需求信息有助于增加制造商和供应链利润。