不同价格模式下的双渠道供应链决策研究

针对由直销渠道和传统零售渠道组成的供应链,考虑需求同时受价格和广告投入影响的情况下供应链的最优决策问题。分别讨论由零售商决定渠道价格的价格一致模式和制造商与零售商分别决定渠道价格的价格非一致模式下的Stackelberg博弈模型,并研究在价格非一致模式下合作广告对决策的影响。最后算例分析将两种价格模式与集中决策模式下的最优决策值及供应链总收益进行比较。分析结果表明,对于制造商和整个双渠道供应链而言,采用价格非一致模式优于价格一致的模式。对于零售商而言,在一定条件下价格一致模式对自己有利。     

Supply chain coordination through cooperative advertising with reference price effect

Cooperative advertising, which usually occurs in a vertical supply chain, is typically a cost sharing and promotion mechanism for the manufacturer to affect retail performance. Research in the literature, however, rarely considers the important phenomenon that advertising has a positive effect on the consumer's reference price. In fact, when a consumer makes a decision to buy a product or not, a reference price is usually in his mind and plays a determinant role. Taking into account the impact of advertising on the reference price, this paper proposes a dynamic cooperative advertising model for a manufacturer–retailer supply chain and analyzes how the reference price effect would influence the decisions of all the channel members. In our model, both the consumer's goodwill and reference price for the product are assumed to be influenced by the advertising and are modeled in differential dynamic equations. In addition, the advertising level, the consumer's goodwill and the reference price are all assumed to have positive effect on sales. Utilizing differential game theory, this paper formulates the optimal decisions of the manufacturer and the retailer in two different game scenarios: Stackelberg game and cooperative game. Also, this paper proposes a new mechanism to coordinate the supply chain in which both the manufacturer and the retailer share each other's advertising costs.     

面向网络零售平台的合作广告策略研究

制造商通过第三方网络零售平台开展直销渠道已经成为普遍模式。除价格策略外，广告宣传是企业获得消费者最常用的策略之一，已有研究表明，合作广告策略可有效协调供应链冲突和优化绩效，但在新零售模式中，传统渠道和网络渠道的特点使得网络零售平台和传统零售商的广告宣传对不同销售渠道的影响更加复杂和有趣，因此本文研究网络零售平台的参与对制造商合作广告策略的影响。在文中通过数学建模的方法比较制造商的四种不同策略：不合作策略、制造商仅与传统零售商合作的策略、制造商仅与网络零售平台合作的策略和制造商与两者均合作的策略，通过对不同策略中渠道成员的利润进行比较，可得以下结论：1）制造商的最佳策略为同时与传统零售商和网络零售平台合作；2）当两渠道的广告存在相互"搭便车"行为时，渠道成员之间最优策略一致；3）当网络、传统渠道的广告宣传为竞争关系时，渠道成员的最优策略不一致，但存在"相对"最优策略：传统零售商和网络零售平台同时与制造商合作，该策略下传统零售商、网络零售平台的利润可能会降低，但降低比例为最小。     

Advertising in Asymmetric Competing Supply Chains

Advertising is a crucial tool for demand creation and market expansion. When a manufacturer uses a retailer as a channel for reaching end customers, the advertising strategy takes on an additional dimension: which party will perform the advertising to end customers. Cost sharing (“co‐operative advertising”) arrangements proliferate the option by decoupling the execution of the advertising from its funding. We examine the efficacy of cost sharing in a model of two competing manufacturer–retailer supply chains who sell partially substitutable products that may differ in market size. Some counterintuitive findings suggest that the firms performing the advertising would rather bear the costs entirely if this protects their unit profit margin. We also evaluate the implications of advertising strategy for overall supply chain efficiency and consumer welfare.     

An Analysis of Manufacturer‐Retailer Supply Chain Coordination in Cooperative Advertising*

In the literature of cooperative (co‐op) advertising, the focus of the research is on a relationship in which a manufacturer is the leader and retailers are followers. This relationship implies the dominance of the manufacturer over retailers. Recent market trends have shown a shift in power from manufacturers to retailers. Retailers, as a result, may now possess equal or even greater power than a manufacturer in some instances when it comes to retailing. Based on this new market phenomenon, we intend to explore the role of co‐op advertising in a manufacturer‐retailer supply chain through brand name investments, local advertising expenditures, and sharing rules of advertising expenses. Two co‐op advertising models are developed and compared. The first co‐op advertising model is based on the traditional leader‐follower relationship of a manufacturer and a retailer. The second model incorporates partnership into co‐op advertising coordination. Business examples and managerial implications of the models have been discussed. A cooperative bargaining technique is utilized to implement the partnership co‐op advertising model.     

Optimal Contract Design for Mixed Channels Under Information Asymmetry

The mixed‐channel model is becoming increasingly popular in the marketplace. In this model, a firm selling through the traditional supply chain of wholesaler and retailer opens a direct channel to the customer through Internet sales. Because both channels have their respective advantages, the manufacturer is attracted to this business model. However, it also leads to channel conflict, with the retailer feeling threatened by direct competition. One way of eliminating the possibility of this channel conflict, where the retailer is allowed to add value to the product to differentiate its offering to the customers, is proposed in this paper. The retailer is also given full authority to make pricing decisions. This paper presents a model, under this scenario, of obtaining optimum pricing decisions by both parties, the amount of value added by the retailer, and the manufacturer's wholesale price to the retailer. Our model incorporates information asymmetry, where the manufacturer has incomplete information about the retailer's cost of adding value. We obtain closed‐form contracts with incomplete information and compare them with those with complete channel coordination. We also develop a number of managerial guidelines and identify future research topics.     

考虑商誉的双渠道供应链动态定价与联合减排策略

考虑由一个制造商和一个零售商组成的双渠道供应链，将产品商誉和减排量作为状态变量构建微分博弈模型。文章首先讨论了不同渠道结构下供应链成员的最优均衡策略，随后探讨了广告合作-减排成本分担契约对供应链协调性的影响，最后通过算例对模型进行了分析。研究发现，产品商誉轨迹随时间变化呈现多变性，而减排量轨迹则具有单调性。与单渠道相比，双渠道下零售商的广告努力和利润下降，而制造商的减排努力和利润增大，只有当传统渠道市场占有率较高且制造商竞争较小时，制造商单渠道的利润才高于双渠道，此时制造商将不会开设网络渠道。广告合作-减排成本分担契约可以实现制造商、零售商和整个供应链系统利润的帕累托改善，且消费者低碳偏好和品牌偏好越高，制造商和零售商越有动力达成合作。     

Pricing Policy in a Supply Chain: Negotiation or Posted Pricing

This article examines the choice of pricing policy (posted pricing or negotiation) toward end customers in a supply chain. Many retailers actively decide whether or not to encourage negotiation on the shop floor. Of course, the retailer's pricing policy influences not only the retailer's profit, but also the profits of the manufacturers who sell through the retailer. However, little is known about the forces that shape the pricing policy when two self‐interested parties interact in a supply chain. We consider two alternative models depending on who has the power to decide the pricing policy: the manufacturer or the retailer. We find that an increase in the wholesale price weakens the retailer's ability to price discriminate through negotiation. Therefore, the retailer prefers negotiation at lower wholesale prices and posted pricing at higher wholesale prices. We also find that whenever the retailer prefers negotiation, the manufacturer does too. Therefore, the retailer's discretion over the pricing policy causes friction only when the retailer wants to use posted pricing, while the manufacturer wishes the retailer to use negotiation. We show that such friction arises only when product availability or the cost of negotiation is moderate. In this case, we show that the manufacturer may offer a substantial discount to persuade the retailer to negotiate. Surprisingly, in this region of friction, a decrease in the supply chain's capacity or an increase in negotiation costs (both of which are typically considered as worsening the retailer's business environment) translates into higher profit for the retailer.     

不对称信息下线上零售商定价与O2O渠道策略研究

针对由制造商和线上零售商组成的供应链，考虑消费者退货行为以及产品退货会给企业造成退货损失，且线上零售商退货损失为其私有信息，研究不对称信息下的供应链定价、O2O渠道策略以及合同设计问题，分析线上零售商引入O2O渠道的可行条件及其对供应双方最优决策和消费者剩余的影响，考察不对称信息对各个企业、供应链系统利润的影响。研究表明，线上零售商引入O2O渠道存在可行条件，取决于退货损失的大小；当线上零售商引入O2O渠道时，制造商和供应链系统的期望利润水平均能得到有效提升；O2O渠道策略有利于提高消费者剩余，但到体验店体验产品的消费者不一定能够得到更高的消费者剩余；如果满足一定条件，则线上零售商会选择信息共享谈判与制造商共享其私有信息，进而实现"双赢"。     

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。     

信息共享对供应链合作广告影响的博弈分析

本文研究需求不确定环境下合作广告供应链中的信息共享对供应链上下游企业决策及绩效的影响。在此供应链中,上游制造商决定产品批发价格及地方性广告费用分担比例,下游零售商决定地方性广告费用的投入及产品售价。运用斯坦伯格博弈模型研究了不确定性对上下游定价和广告投入决策的影响,分析比较了有信息共享和无信息共享两种情况下供应链各成员及供应链利润。结果表明,对零售商而言,其广告水平,产品售价,及期望利润都随着广告效应的增大而增加;对制造商而言,当广告费用分担率较大时,较强的广告效应会导致零售商对广告的过度投入,从而损害制造商的利润。给定制造商广告分担率,信息共享可以提高制造商期望利润,却减少了零售商期望利润,并可能减少供应链的总体利润。给定批发价格的情况下,信息共享会提高制造商及供应链期望利润,而对零售商来讲无差别。     

A Mobile Platform's In‐App Advertising Contract Under Agency Pricing for App Sales

Unlike advertising in traditional media, a mobile platform's in‐app advertising market exhibits two unique features—split structure of the mobile platform with a platform owner and an app developer jointly provisioning in‐app advertising, and agency pricing for app sales. We develop a two‐sided market model to analyze the role of these two unique features in determining the platform owner's optimal advertising revenue‐sharing contract. Our results reveal an interesting N‐shaped dynamic regarding the platform owner's optimal choice of her ad revenue share with respect to the overall advertisers’ valuation of in‐app ads. We identify a between‐agent subsidization strategy for the platform owner, where she finds it optimal to subsidize the developer via the advertising channel, leading to greater profits for both of them. We find that the advertising revenue‐sharing contract under agency pricing for app sales leads to a higher app price than would be offered by the integrated platform found in traditional advertising. However, the ad price is coordinated under the platform owner's optimal choice of ad revenue share when she obtains revenue from both the advertising and app sales channels, leading to an alignment of her interest with the app developer's on ad level.     

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.     

Manufacturer's pricing strategy for supply chain with warranty period-dependent demand

This article presents a review of the issues associated with a manufacturer's pricing strategies in a two-echelon supply chain that comprises one manufacturer and two competing retailers, with warranty period-dependent demands. The manufacturer, as a Stackelberg leader, specifies wholesale prices to two competing retailers who face warranty period-dependent demand and have different sales costs. The manufacturer considers three pricing options: (1) setting the same price for both retailers, while disregarding their difference with regard to sales cost; (2) setting a different price to each retailer on the basis of their sales cost; and (3) setting the same price to both retailers according to the average sales cost of the industry. In this article, the retailers' optimal warranty periods and their optimal profit, manufacturer's optimal wholesale price, and his/her optimal profit associated with different pricing strategies have been derived using the game theory. Our analysis shows that the results for retailers are the same with Strategy 1 or Strategy 3. In addition, we compared the effects of different pricing strategies of the manufacturer on supply chain decisions and profit. We conclude from the results that the manufacturer should either adopt Strategy 2 with symmetrical sales cost information or Strategy 3 if retailers' sales costs are asymmetrical.     

考虑线下权力结构的制造商线上销售模式选择研究

在线下垂直实力对等、制造商主导和实体店主导三种渠道权力结构下，构建制造商、实体店和电商之间的博弈模型，探讨线下渠道权力结构与制造商线上销售模式的匹配关系。研究结果表明：（1）当电商要求的佣金比例较小时，在不同的线下渠道权力结构下，制造商都应该选择线上代销模式；而当电商要求的佣金比例较大时，在线下垂直实力对等结构下，制造商应该选择线上转销模式，而在制造商主导和实体店主导结构下，制造商应该选择线上代销模式。（2）当制造商选择线上转销模式时，在线下制造商主导的结构下，制造商给予实体店的批发价格最大，在垂直实力对等结构下次之，在实体店主导结构下最小。然而，线下渠道权力结构的差异并不会影响制造商给予电商的批发价格。（3）当制造商选择线上代销模式时，在线下制造商主导结构下，线下销售价格最高；在线下垂直实力对等结构下，线上销售价格最高。     

展厅现象下的双渠道供应链定价策略

针对双渠道供应链中展厅现象将加剧传统渠道与电子渠道的价格竞争问题，利用消费者效用理论，以存在展厅现象的差异化定价策略为基准，分别设计能够消除展厅现象的一致性定价策略和限价策略。研究结果显示相比差异化定价策略，一致性定价策略可以减轻传统渠道与电子渠道的价格竞争，并总是对零售商有利，但当顾客到传统渠道麻烦成本较高和批发价格较低时，也将有利于制造商；此外，双渠道供应链成员是否选择限价策略，依赖于传统渠道与电子渠道的价差，随着价差的降低制造商与零售商的利润都将提高，特别当两个渠道的价差较小时，限价策略可以有效降低价格竞争，从而促进双渠道供应链成员达到双赢状态。     

碳限额与碳交易机制下考虑公平关切的供应链定价与协调研究

供应链企业的公平关切是发展与维持良好供应链上下游合作关系的重要因素。面对消费者的低碳偏好与碳排放规制约束,供应链企业在确定最优定价与减排水平等运作决策时,常常表现较强的公平关切倾向。探究环保规制下公平关切如何影响供应链的运作决策,可以为供应链合作提供对策。本文在碳限额与碳交易机制下,研究了由公平关切制造商和公平关切零售商组成的低碳供应链的最优定价和碳减排率等决策,分析了公平关切对最优定价和碳减排水平及利润的影响,并讨论了收益共享-成本共担契约模型对供应链的协调性,最后通过数值仿真验证了主要结论。结果表明：(1)制造商和零售商都公平关切时,收益共享-成本共担契约的参数若满足一定条件,供应链可以实现协调。(2)批发价与制造商公平关切系数正相关,零售价与制造商和零售商公平关切系数都正相关;若制造商考虑零售商公平关切则批发价的变化取决于碳减排成本系数的大小,碳减排率与制造商和零售商的公平关切系数是负相关;若制造商忽视零售商的公平关切,则批发价仅受制造商自身公平关切的影响, 碳减排率与制造商公平关切负相关,与零售商公平关切无关。(3)制造商公平关切对双方利润具有负向影响,零售商公平关切对制造商利润也有负向影响,而零售商利润随自身公平关切的变化情况取决于制造商是否考虑其公平关切,若考虑则两者正相关,否则两者负相关。     

Contracting in a Supply Chain with Stochastic Demand and Substitute Products

Retailers often stock competing products from multiple manufacturers. When the retailer stocks out of a particular item, customers who prefer the item are likely, with some probability, to switch to a substitute product from another manufacturer at the same store. In such an event, a “lost sale” for the manufacturer is not a “lost sale” for the retailer. This exacerbates differences in manufacturer's and retailer's stockout costs for the item. Such differences in stockout cost influence the optimal contract between the manufacturer and the retailer and also impose agency costs on the channel. Such contracts, in turn, determine equilibrium inventory levels and fill rates. We study these issues in a single‐period supply chain, consisting of a manufacturer and a retailer, under three different scenarios (when the two firms are integrated into a single entity, when the retailer makes stocking decisions, and when the manufacturer makes stocking decisions). We compare, and present a methodology for comparing, stocking quantities, manufacturer efforts, and supply chain profits across different scenarios. We find that VMI performs better when manufacturer effort is a substantial driver of consumer demand and when consumers are unlikely to substitute to another brand in case of a stockout. On the other hand, if non‐contractible manufacturer effort is unimportant, or when substitution is significant, VMI can exacerbate, rather than mitigate, channel inefficiencies, and can perform worse than traditional Retailer Managed Inventory.     

CSR投入对闭环供应链定价与协调决策的影响

研究了供应链成员的社会责任（CSR）投入行为对闭环供应链决策的影响。考虑了闭环供应链中以下四种不同的CSR投入方式：（1）无CSR投入;（2）制造商投入CSR;（3）零售商投入CSR;（4）制造商和零售商同时投入CSR。通过对比不同模型的均衡决策和利润,发现制造商和零售商同时进行CSR投入的方式对闭环供应链决策成员和系统均最有利,而零售商投入CSR的方式优于制造商投入CSR方式。其次,以集中化决策模型的最优结果为基准,探讨了不同CSR投入方式下分散化闭环供应链系统的协调机制设计问题。结果表明：两部定价契约能有效实现CSR约束的闭环供应链的协调;且在制造商与零售商同时投入CSR决策情形,契约中制造商的议价能力最弱,零售商的议价能力最强。最后,通过算例分析了模型中关键参数对闭环供应链均衡决策与利润的影响,并进一步对闭环供应链协调的性能进行了分析。     

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"。