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.     

Optimal Inventory Control with Dual‐Sourcing,Heterogeneous Ordering Costs and Order Size Constraints

We consider a dual‐sourcing inventory system, where procuring from one supplier involves a high variable cost but negligible fixed cost whereas procuring from the other supplier involves a low variable cost but high fixed cost, as well as an order size constraint. We show that the problem can be reduced to an equivalent single‐sourcing problem. However, the corresponding ordering cost is neither concave nor convex. Using the notion of quasi‐convexity, we partially characterize the structure of the optimal policy and show that it can be specified by multiple thresholds which determine when to order from each supplier and how much. In contrast to previous research, which does not consider order size constraints, we show that it is optimal to simultaneously source from both suppliers when the beginning inventory level is sufficiently low. We also show that the decision to source from the low‐cost supplier is not monotonic in the inventory level. Our results require that the variable costs satisfy a certain condition which guarantees quasi‐convexity. However, extensive numerical results suggest that our policy is almost always optimal when the condition is not satisfied. We also show how the results can be extended to systems with multiple capacitated suppliers.     

Multiperiod Models with Capacities in Competitive Supply Chain

This paper considers a supply chain setting where several capacitated suppliers compete for orders from a single retailer in a multiperiod environment. At each period, the retailer places orders to the suppliers in response to the prices they announce. Each supplier has a fixed capacity. We consider a make‐to‐stock setting where the retailer can carry inventory. The retailer faces exogenous, price‐dependent demand. We study the problem using ideas from fluid models. In particular, we (i) analyze when there are pure equilibrium policies in this setting and characterize the structure of these policies; (ii) consider coordination mechanisms; and (iii) present some preliminary computational results. We also consider a modified model that uses option contracts to coordinate the supply chain.     

Supply Contract Design for Competing Heterogeneous Suppliers under Asymmetric Information

This study considers a supply chain with two heterogeneous suppliers and a common retailer whose type is either low‐volume or high‐volume. The retailer's type is unknown to the suppliers. The flexible supplier has a high variable cost and a low fixed cost, while the efficient supplier has a low variable cost and a high fixed cost. Each supplier offers the retailer a menu of contracts. The retailer chooses the contract that maximizes its expected profit. For this setting, we characterize the equilibrium contract menus offered by the suppliers to the retailer. We find that the equilibrium contract menus depend on which supplier–retailer match can generate the highest supply chain profit and on how much information rent the supplier may need to pay. An important feature of the equilibrium contract menus is that the contract assigned to the more profitable retailer will coordinate the supply chain, while the contract assigned to the less profitable retailer may not. In addition, in some circumstances, the flexible supplier may choose not to serve the high‐volume retailer, in order to avoid excessive information rent.     

时变需求环境下供应链缺货时点与补货次数优化研究

本文基于博弈模型,研究在时变需求和无替代供应源的环境下供需双方缺货时点和补货次数的纳什均衡问题,并通过算例,具体分析了供需之间的关系,主要结论有:配送商的补货次数越大,零售商库存成本越小;补货次数优化后零售商与配送商的库存成本明显下降。     

Lead Time Management through Expediting in a Continuous Review Inventory System

We consider a continuous review inventory system where delivery lead times can be managed by expediting in‐transit orders shipped from the supplier. First, we propose an ordering/expediting policy and derive expressions for evaluating the operating characteristics of such systems. Second, using extensive numerical experiments, we quantify the benefits of such an expediting policy. Third, we investigate a number of managerial issues. Specifically, we analyze the impact of the number of expediting hubs and their locations along the shipment network on the performance of such systems and offer insights into the design of the shipment network. We show (i) a single expediting hub that is optimally located in a shipment network can capture the majority of cost savings achieved by a multi‐hub system, especially when expediting cost is not low or demand variability is not high; (ii) when expediting time is proportional to the time to destination, for small‐enough or large‐enough demand variations, a single expediting hub located in the middle of the shipment network can capture the majority of cost savings of an optimally located hub; and (iii) in general, hubs close to the retailer significantly drive down costs, whereas hubs close to the supplier may not offer much cost savings.     

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。     

Optimal payment time under permissible delay in payment for products with deterioration

A permissible credit period is usually allowed to a retailer to pay back the dues without paying any interest to the supplier. The retailer can pay the supplier either at the end of the credit period or later incurring interest charges on the unpaid balance for the overdue period. The retailer is expected to settle the account at a time before the end of the inventory cycle time because the payable interest rate is generally higher than the earned interest rate. A model for optimal cycle and payment times is developed here for a retailer in a deteriorating-item inventory situation where a supplier allows a specified credit period to the retailer for payment without penalty. Under these conditions, this supplier-and-retailer system is modelled as a cost minimization problem to determine the optimal payment time under various system parameters. An iterative search procedure is applied to solve the problem, and the overall findings indicate that the retailer always has an option to pay after the permissible credit period depending on unit purchase and selling price, the deterioration rate of the products and the interest rate.     

Effect of Inventory Information Discrepancy in a Drop‐Shipping Supply Chain

This article investigates the impact of information discrepancy between a drop‐shipper and an online retailer on the drop‐shipping supply chain performance. The inventory information misalignment between them contributes to the failure of order fulfillment and demand satisfaction, and hence the associated penalties are incurred. In this article, we first analyze the penalties of ignoring such information discrepancy on both the drop‐shipper and the online retailer. We then assess the impact of information discrepancy on both parties when the drop‐shipper understands the existence of the information discrepancy but is not able to eliminate the errors. The numerical experiments indicate that both parties can have significant amount of the percentage cost reductions if the information discrepancy can be eliminated, and the potential savings are substantial especially when the errors have large variability. Furthermore, we observe that the online retailer is more vulnerable to information discrepancy than the drop‐shipper, and the drop‐shipper is likely to suffer from the online retailer's underestimation of the physical inventory level more than the problem of its overestimation. Moreover, even if eliminating errors is not possible, both parties could still benefit from taking the possibility of errors into consideration in decision making.     

Grocery Perishables Management

In this article, we study the joint pricing and inventory control problem for perishables when a retailer does not sell new and old inventory at the same time. At the beginning of a period, the retailer makes replenishment and pricing decisions, and at the end of a period, the retailer decides whether to dispose of ending inventory or carry it forward to the next period. The objective of the retailer is to maximize the long‐run average profit. Assuming zero lead time, we propose an efficient solution approach to the problem, which is also generalized to solve three extensions to the basic model. A feature of the present study is that we consider explicitly the influence of perishability on the demand. Among the insights gathered from the numerical analysis, we find that dynamic pricing aids extending shelf life and when disposal incurs a lower cost, or even a positive salvage value, the retailer is induced to dispose earlier since the benefit of selling new inventory offsets the loss due to disposal. We also observe that the faster the perceived rate of deterioration, the lower the threshold of the ending inventory for disposal. Perhaps a bit counter‐intuitive, maximizing profits does not mean eliminating disposals or expirations.     

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.     

Multiple In‐Cycle Transshipments with Positive Delivery Times

We study a centralized inventory sharing system of two retailers that are replenished periodically. Between two replenishments, a unit can be transshipped to a stocked‐out retailer from the other. It arrives a transshipment time later, during which the stocked‐out retailer incurs backorder cost. Without transshipment, backorder cost is incurred until the next replenishment. Since the transshipment time is shorter than the time between two replenishments, transshipments can reduce the backorder cost at the stocked‐out retailer and the holding costs at the other retailer. The system is directed by a centralized inventory manager, who minimizes the long‐run average cost consisting of replenishment, holding, backorder, and transshipment costs. The transshipment policy is characterized by hold‐back inventory levels, which are nonincreasing in the remaining time until the next replenishment. The transshipment policy differs from those in the literature because we allow for multiple transshipments between replenishments, positive transshipment times, and backorder costs. We also discuss the challenges associated with positive replenishment time and develop upper and lower bounds of average cost in this case. Bounds are numerically shown to have an average gap of 1.1%. A heuristic solution is based on the upper bound and differs from the optimal cost by at most this gap.     

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。     

Role of Random Capacity Risk and the Retailer in Decentralized Supply Chains with Competing Suppliers

This research considers a supply chain under the following conditions: (i) two heterogeneous suppliers are in competition, (ii) supply capacity is random and pricing is endogenous, (iii) consumer demand, with and without an intermediate retailer, is price dependent. Specifically, we examine how uncertainty in supply capacity affects optimal ordering and pricing decisions, supplier and retailer profits, and the incentives to reduce such uncertainty. When two suppliers sell through a monopolistic retailer, supply uncertainty not only affects the retailer's diversification strategy for replenishment, but also changes the suppliers’ wholesale price competition and the incentive for reducing capacity uncertainty. In this dual‐sourcing model, we show that the benefit of reducing capacity uncertainty depends on the cost heterogeneity between the suppliers. In addition, we show that a supplier does not necessarily benefit from capacity variability reduction. We contrast this incentive misalignment with findings from the single‐supplier case and a supplier‐duopoly case where both suppliers sell directly to market without the monopolistic retailer. In the latter single‐supplier and duopoly cases, we prove that the unreliable supplier always benefits from reducing capacity variability. These results highlight the role of the retailer's diversification strategy in distorting a supplier's incentive for reducing capacity uncertainty under supplier price competition.     

零售货架的线性补贴策略与供应链协调

考虑由一个供应商和一个零售商构成的供应链,供应商提供零售商单一产品,零售阶段的市场需求量随机地依赖于零售商的货架展示量。由于货架空间的稀缺,零售商的成本为非线性的成本函数以符合实际的情况。如果零售商在观察到需求之前决定货架空间,货架补贴可以提高渠道效率;如果零售商在观察需求之后,进行货架决策,补贴降低了供应链效率。由于零售商的努力水平可以验证,供应商可以使用回购加零售货架的线性补贴策略协调供应链,但是需要考虑零售阶段的库存决策与货架分配的决策顺序,而采取完全不同的协调方式。最后通过数值算例说明了所得结论。     

Sharing inventory risk in supply chain: The implication of financial constraint

A supply chain may operate under either preorder mode, consignment mode or the combination of these two modes. Under preorder, the retailer procures before the sale and takes full inventory risk during the sale, while under consignment, the retailer sells the product for the supplier with the supplier taking the inventory risk. The combination mode shares the risk in the supply chain. The existing research has examined the supply chain modes from various operational aspects. However, the impact of financial constraint is neglected. This paper examines the impact of financial constraint and investigates the supply chain efficiency under each mode. Based on a Stackelberg game with the supplier being the leader, we show that without financial constraint the supplier always prefers the consignment mode, taking full inventory risk. Whereas, in the presence of financial constraint, the supplier will sell part of the inventory to the retailer through preorder, which shares the inventory risk in the supply chain. We show that with financial constraint, the combination mode is the most efficient mode even if the retailer earns zero internal capital.     

STOCK LEVELS AND DELIVERY RATES IN VENDORMANAGED INVENTORY PROGRAMS

Using the latest information technology, powerful retailers like Wal‐Mart have taken the lead in forging shorter replenishment‐cycles, automated supply systems with suppliers. With the objective to reduce cost, these retailers are directing suppliers to take full responsibility for managing stocks and deliveries. Suppliers' performance is measured according to how often inventory is shipped to the retailer, and how often customers are unable to purchase the product because it is out of stock. This emerging trend also implies that suppliers are absorbing a large part of the inventory and delivery costs and, therefore, must plan delivery programs including delivery frequency to ensure that the inherent costs are minimized. With the idea to incorporate this shift in focus, this paper looks at the problem facing the supplier who wants quicker replenishment at lower cost. In particular, we present a model that seeks the best trade‐off among inventory investment, delivery rates, and permitting shortages to occur, given some random demand pattern for the product. The process generating demand consists of two components: one is deterministic and the other is random. The random part is assumed to follow a compound Poisson process. Furthermore, we assume that the supplier may fail to meet uniform shipping schedules, and, therefore, uncertainty is present in delivery times. The solution to this transportationinventory problem requires determining jointly delivery rates and stock levels that will minimize transportation, inventory, and shortage costs. Several numerical results are presented to give a feel of the optimal policy's general behavior.     

Coordinated Logistics: Joint Replenishment with Capacitated Transportation for a Supply Chain

In this study, we consider the integrated inventory replenishment and transportation operations in a supply chain where the orders placed by the downstream retailer are dispatched by the upstream warehouse via an in‐house fleet of limited size. We first consider the single‐item single‐echelon case where the retailer operates with a quantity based replenishment policy, (r,Q), and the warehouse is an ample supplier. We model the transportation operations as a queueing system and derive the operating characteristics of the system in exact terms. We extend this basic model to a two‐echelon supply chain where the warehouse employs a base‐stock policy. The departure process of the warehouse is characterized in distribution, which is then approximated by an Erlang arrival process by matching the first two moments for the analysis of the transportation queueing system. The operating characteristics and the expected cost rate are derived. An extension of this system to multiple retailers is also discussed. Numerical results are presented to illustrate the performance and the sensitivity of the models and the value of coordinating inventory and transportation operations.     

Contracting Under Vendor Managed Inventory Systems Using Holding Cost Subsidies

Vendor managed inventory systems are becoming increasingly popular. An important issue in implementing a vendor managed inventory scheme is the contracting terms that dictate the ownership of the inventory and the responsibility of inventory replenishment decisions. Thus the performance of a vendor managed system crucially depends on these terms and on how inventory‐related costs are shared in a supply chain. We consider a system where a manufacturer supplies a single product to a retailer who faces random demand in a competitive market. The retailer incurs a fixed cost per order, inventory holding cost, and a penalty cost for a stockout (unsatisfied demand is back‐ordered). Further, the manufacturer incurs a penalty cost when there is a stockout at the retailer and a fixed replenishment cost. We assume that the players are rational and act noncooperatively. We compare the performance of retailer managed inventory systems, where the retailer places orders and makes replenishment decisions, with vendor managed inventory systems, wherein the vendor or manufacturer makes inventory and replenishment decisions. Specifically, in the vendor managed inventory system, we propose and evaluate holding cost subsidy‐type contracts on inventories offered by the retailer to improve system performance. We evaluate this contract in the context of three widely used inventory systems—deterministic economic order quantity, continuous review (Q, r) policies, and periodic review policies—and show when such contracts may improve channel performance.     

Enabling Opportunism: Revenue Sharing when Sales Revenues are Unobservable

We consider a supply chain with a supplier that sells to a retailer under a revenue‐sharing arrangement. Demand is uncertain and unobservable to the supplier. We assume that the retailer is rational, that is, the retailer behaves opportunistically and underreports sales revenues to the supplier whenever such underreporting is profitable. Assuming the supplier has the ability to audit the retailer and learn about the actual sales revenues, we show that the supplier will never find it optimal to audit to the point that ensures truthful reporting for all demand realizations. By committing to an auditing policy, the supplier can exploit retailer opportunism and derive profits that at times even exceed those that could be obtained when dealing with a retailer that always strictly adheres to the agreed‐upon contract terms. We also show that the retailer's opportunistic behavior can increase total supply chain profits.