基于库存分担策略的装配系统准时供货模型研究

本文考虑一个由多供应商和单制造商构成的装配系统。当市场的需求时间无法确定时,制造商通过对供应商设定合理的库存分担策略来降低自身成本,供应商则需要自行决定对制造商的补货时间并承担相应的库存持有成本和延迟惩罚成本。文章同时建立了供应商之间的纳什博弈模型和以制造商为主方的主从博弈模型,以找到供应商的最佳供货时间和制造商最优的库存承担时限。通过对比不同模式下供应链的整体绩效,找到实现供应链协调运作的必要条件,并通过数据分析进一步证明相关结论。     

Coordinating Supply Chains via Advance‐Order Discounts,Minimum Order Quantities,and Delegations

To avoid inventory risks, manufacturers often place rush orders with suppliers only after they receive firm orders from their customers (retailers). Rush orders are costly to both parties because the supplier incurs higher production costs. We consider a situation where the supplier's production cost is reduced if the manufacturer can place some of its order in advance. In addition to the rush order contract with a pre‐established price, we examine whether the supplier should offer advance‐order discounts to encourage the manufacturer to place a portion of its order in advance, even though the manufacturer incurs some inventory risk. While the advance‐order discount contract is Pareto‐improving, our analysis shows that the discount contract cannot coordinate the supply chain. However, if the supplier imposes a pre‐specified minimum order quantity requirement as a qualifier for the manufacturer to receive the advance‐order discount, then such a combined contract can coordinate the supply chain. Furthermore, the combined contract enables the supplier to attain the first‐best solution. We also explore a delegation contract that either party could propose. Under this contract, the manufacturer delegates the ordering and salvaging activities to the supplier in return for a discounted price on all units procured. We find the delegation contract coordinates the supply chain and is Pareto‐improving. We extend our analysis to a setting where the suppliers capacity is limited for advance production but unlimited for rush orders. Our structural results obtained for the one‐supplier‐one‐manufacturer case continue to hold when we have two manufacturers.     

Matching Product Architecture and Supply Chain Configuration

In this paper, we examine the suggested link between product architecture (i.e., the extent to which a product is modular vs. integral) and supply chain configuration (i.e., whether the product development is done internally by the manufacturer in an integrated supply chain or in collaboration with a supplier in a decentralized supply chain). Our model suggests that the choice of product architecture depends on firm, market, and product characteristics in addition to supply chain structure. In contrast to other studies, we find that the optimal mapping from architecture to supply chain structure is not always one‐to‐one. A decentralized supply chain may be associated with a more integral product when the technical collaboration penalty is not excessive and suppliers have significantly superior product development capabilities. Furthermore, in a decentralized supply chain, the nature of the relationship between the original equipment manufacturer and its supplier (adversarial or collaborative) plays a role in the choice of product architecture: modular architectures are more likely when the parties have adversarial relationships, while long‐term trust‐based relationships facilitate more integral product architectures.     

Willingness to Pay for Shifting Inventory Risk: The Role of Contractual Form

In order to reduce their inventory risk, firms can attempt to contract with their suppliers for shorter supply lead‐times, with their buyers for longer demand lead‐times, or both. We designed a controlled laboratory experiment to study contracts that shift a focal firm's inventory risk to its supply chain partners and address two questions. First, is it more effective if the cost of shifting inventory risk is framed as a fixed fee or in per‐unit cost terms? We find that, generally, our participants are willing to pay more to avoid supply–demand mismatches than the expected costs from such mismatches. This tendency to overpay is mitigated under fixed fee schemes. Second, does it matter whether the option to reduce inventory risk is the outcome of either increased responsiveness from the upstream supplier or advanced demand information from the downstream buyer? Our results suggest that this difference, when only a matter of framing, has no significant effect on willingness‐to‐pay.     

同步物流系统下准时化生产与配送调度问题研究

对于"加工-装配"行业而言,物流管理水平的高低直接决定了供应链绩效的好坏。本文以Supply Hub运作模式为背景,研究同步物流下装配系统中各节点的生产与配送调度问题。建立供应链各参与方的生产与配送模型,并通过规划求解得到供应商和制造商的最优生产周期、零部件的最优配送间隔以及零售商的最佳采购周期。最后,结合数值实验,对同步物流模式和传统物流模式下的供应链绩效进行了对比分析。研究结果表明:较之传统物流模式,基于同步化物流方式的装配系统总成本更低,这主要得益于库存成本的下降;由于采取拉动式的生产模式,因此同步物流系统下供应链中的生产和配送活动更加频繁;生产调整成本的增加提高了制造商的平均总成本,由此可见在同步物流系统下,供应商、制造商和零售商之间更需要相互协商和收益共享,从而实现多赢。     

The Impact of Contracts and Competition on Upstream Innovation in a Supply Chain

We consider a supply chain with an upstream supplier who invests in innovation and a downstream manufacturer who sells to consumers. We study the impact of supply chain contracts with endogenous upstream innovation, focusing on three different contract scenarios: (i) a wholesale price contract, (ii) a quality‐dependent wholesale price contract, and (iii) a revenue‐sharing contract. We confirm that the revenue‐sharing contract can coordinate supply chain decisions including the innovation investment, whereas the other two contracts may result in underinvestment in innovation. However, the downstream manufacturer does not always prefer the revenue‐sharing contract; the manufacturer's profit can be higher with a quality‐dependent wholesale price contract than with a revenue‐sharing contract, specifically when the upstream supplier's innovation cost is low. We then extend our model to incorporate upstream competition between suppliers. By inviting upstream competition, with the wholesale price contract, the manufacturer can increase his profit substantially. Furthermore, under upstream competition, the revenue‐sharing contract coordinates the supply chain, and results in an optimal contract form for the manufacturer when suppliers are symmetric. We also analyze the case of complementary components suppliers, and show that most of our results are robust.     

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.     

基于多重结算方式的装配系统协同问题研究

鉴于装配系统中存在的众多不确定因素,制造商往往采取延迟付款(货齐付款)的方式来降低供应商供货不同步的风险,而供应商则倾向于采用及时付款(货到付款).本文以装配系统为研究对象,分别针对延迟付款和及时付款方式建立了两供应商对单制造商的准时供货模型,考虑当每个零部件的供货提前期均不确定时,供应商和制造商应该如何进行相应的生产...     

Measuring and analysing supply chain schedule stability: A case study in the automotive industry

Final assembly plants send material schedules to first-tier suppliers who in turn send schedules to second-tier suppliers and so on through the multiple tiers of the supply chain. A key cost driver for the supply chain is a schedule characteristic termed stability. The Total Quality Management approach is applied to improve schedule stability in the supply chain of a large vertically integrated automotive manufacturer. A measurement described, actual stability results are provided, the causes of instability are listed, and some corrective actions are specified. Results indicate that schedule stability can be improved without damaging the performance of other measures such as inventory and customer responsiveness. and analysis process is     

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。     

供需不确定下基于MOI和VMI模式的供应链协同比较研究

为分析供应链运作机制对降低随机供应商产出和随机需求的影响,对比研究了两供应商-单制造商系统在MOI和VMI两种模式下的供应链协同模型。MOI模式下,制造商管理并持有库存,提出了供应风险共享的协同机制;VMI模式下,供应商管理并持有库存,提出了收益共享与额外惩罚的协同机制。分析了集中决策、MOI和VMI模式下的最优批量决策,证明了VMI模式下存在唯一的纳什均衡。研究还发现,VMI模式更容易协调供应链,有效降低供需不确定的影响。MOI模式下的供应链可实现帕累托改进,但不能实现协调;而当参数满足一定关系时,VMI模式下供应链的期望利润可达到集中决策。     

Value of Sharing Production Yield Information in a Serial Supply Chain

New developments in corporate information technology such as enterprise resource planning systems have significantly increased the flow of information among members of supply chains. However, the benefits of sharing information can vary depending on the supply chain structure and its operational characteristics. Most of the existing research has studied the impact of sharing downstream information (e.g., a manufacturer sharing information with its suppliers). We evaluate the benefits of sharing upstream yield information (e.g., a supplier sharing information with the manufacturer) in a two‐stage serial supply chain in which the supplier has multiple internal processes and is faced with uncertain output due to yield losses. We are interested in determining when the sharing of the supplier's information is most beneficial to the manufacturer. After proposing an order‐up‐to type heuristic policy, we perform a detailed computational study and observe that this information is most beneficial when the supplier's yield variance is high and when end‐customer demand variance is low. We also find that the manufacturer's backorder‐to‐holding cost ratio has little, if any, impact on the usefulness of information.     

Assembly Systems with Sequential Supplier Decisions and Uncertain Demand

We consider multitier push assembly systems with sequential supplier decisions and a wholesale price contract. We show that both an Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)–Contract Manufacturer (CM) assembly and a modular assembly with sequential supplier decisions are mathematically equivalent to the corresponding traditional assembly. We determine that, in most cases, the first mover supplier realizes a higher profit than the second mover supplier but we also identify the sufficient conditions for the reverse to occur. We provide conditions under which the order quantity, the second mover profit, total supplier profits, and the assembler profit are either higher or lower for a multitier system with sequential suppliers compared to simultaneous suppliers. We conclude that the first mover is always better off in a three‐tier sequential system while she can be either better off or worse off in a four‐tier sequential system compared to the corresponding simultaneous systems. We also analyze the impact of information asymmetry on the supplier and assembler profits in a three‐tier sequential system. Finally, we determine the profit threshold for an independent manufacturer in a three‐tier system to become a CM in a four‐tier system and vice versa.     

多部件采购外包的两阶段均衡投标策略

本文考虑一个由单个制造商和多个供应商群体组成的供应链——该制造商需要采购多个部件,对于每个部件在市场上均存在多个供应商。不同于传统的从各供应商群体分别采购各个部件,制造商考虑将所有部件的采购整体外包给某个供应商。在第一阶段,制造商使用一级价格密封投标的逆向拍卖来确定赢得整体采购合约的供应商。接下来,第一阶段投标的获胜者生产其所能供应的部件,并使用逆向拍卖向第一阶段中未获胜的其他竞标者采购其余部件。我们分析了供应商在两个阶段的均衡竞价策略,并比较了制造商在亲自逐件采购和外包整体采购两种情况下的期望采购成本。我们证明了在两种机制下制造商的总的期望采购成本相等。     

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.     

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.     

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.     

The Value of Production Schedule Integration in Supply Chains

This study explores the value of integrated production schedules for reducing the negative effects of schedule revisions in supply chains involving buyer and supplier firms. A stochastic cost model is developed to evaluate the total supply chain cost with integrated purchasing and scheduling policies. The model minimizes the costs associated with assembly rate adjustment, safety stock, and schedule changes for all supply chain members. Through experimentation, the paper examines the impact of several environmental factors on the value of schedule integration. This study finds that schedule integration can lead to overall cost savings in a supply chain, but some firms may have to absorb costs in excess of those they would incur with independent scheduling. Environments with high inventory holding costs and long supplier lead times may not find it beneficial to adopt an integrated schedule. Forecast effectiveness plays a critical role in realizing the benefits of schedule integration. The paper concludes with suggestions for future research.     

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.     

基于RFID技术的双供应链投资决策研究

本文考虑零售商主导的分别由一个供应商和一个零售商组成的两条竞争型供应链中,当两个供应商都未投资RFID技术、只有一个供应商投资RFID技术以及两个供应商同时投资RFID技术时,考虑供应商成本结构的差异,对比分析供应链的投资决策。由于模型解析解过于复杂,本文通过算例分析,着重考虑产品的替代率、RFID标签价格以及库存可获得率三个因素对供应链成员利润的影响。结果表明两条供应链对RFID技术的投资决策会因成本结构和产品替代率的不同而发生变化,其中在两个供应商生产成本差异较大且产品竞争强度较低时,生产成本较高的供应商更愿意投资RFID技术,而生产成本较低的供应商不愿意投资RFID技术,两个零售商则希望使用RFID技术,所以此时仅会有一条供应链上的成员达成一致,决定投资使用RFID技术。