Inventory Management for Customers with Alternative Lead Times

It is common for suppliers operating in batch‐production mode to deal with patient and impatient customers. This paper considers inventory models in which a supplier provides alternative lead times to its customers: a short or a long lead time. Orders from patient customers can be taken by the supplier and included in the next production cycle, while orders from impatient customers have to be satisfied from the on‐hand inventory. We denote the action to commit one unit of on‐hand inventory to patient or impatient customers as the inventory‐commitment decision, and the initial inventory stocking as the inventory‐replenishment decision. We first characterize the optimal inventory‐commitment policy as a threshold type, and then prove that the optimal inventory‐replenishment policy is a base‐stock type. Then, we extend our analysis to models to consider cases of a multi‐cycle setting, a supply‐capacity constraint, and the on‐line charged inventory‐holding cost. We also evaluate and compare the performances of the optimal inventory‐commitment policy and the inventory‐rationing policy. Finally, to further investigate the benefits and pitfalls of introducing an alternative lead‐time choice, we use the customer‐choice model to study the demand gains and losses, known as demand‐induction and demand‐cannibalization effects, respectively.     

The Impact of Revenue‐Maximizing Priority Pricing on Customer Delay Costs

Speed is an increasingly important determinant of which suppliers will be given customers' business and is defined as the time between when an order is placed by the customer and when the product is delivered, or as the amount of time customers must wait before they receive their desired service. In either case, the speed a customer experiences can be enhanced by giving priority to that particular customer. Such a prioritization scheme will necessarily reduce the speed experienced by lower‐priority customers, but this can lead to a better outcome when different customers place different values on speed. We model a single resource (e.g., a manufacturer) that processes jobs from customers who have heterogeneous waiting costs. We analyze the price that maximizes priority revenue for the resource owner (i.e., supplier, manufacturer) under different assumptions regarding customer behavior. We discover that a revenue‐maximizing supplier facing self‐interested customers (i.e., those that independently minimize their own expected costs) charges a price that also minimizes the expected total delay costs across all customers and that this outcome does not result when customers coordinate to submit priority orders at a level that seeks to minimize their aggregate costs of priority fees and delays. Thus, the customers are better off collectively (as is the supplier) when the supplier and customers act independently in their own best interests. Finally, as the number of priority classes increases, both the priority revenues and the overall customer delay costs improve, but at a decreasing rate.     

Single‐Period Two‐Product Assemble‐to‐Order Systems with a Common Component and Uncertain Demand Patterns

We consider a single‐period assemble‐to‐order system that produces two types of end products to satisfy two independent and stochastic customer orders. Each type of product is used to fulfill a particular customer order and these two products share a common component. Furthermore, one customer may confirm her order before the other one, and the manufacturer needs to make a commitment immediately upon the receipt of each customer order on how many products to be delivered. We propose a model for optimizing the inventory and production decisions under the above ATO environment. We also extend our model to the situation where the manufacturer can fulfill the unsatisfied low‐priority demand using the left‐over inventories after fulfilling the high‐priority demand, in case the low‐priority customer arrives first. Numerical experiments are conducted, which provide some interesting insights on the impact of uncertain demand pattern.     

INVENTORY RATIONING AND SHIPMENT FLEXIBILITY ALTERNATIVES FOR DIRECT MARKET FIRMS

This paper investigates inventory‐rationing policies of interest to firms operating in a direct market channel. We model a single product with two demand classes, where one class requests a lower order fulfillment lead time but pays a higher price. Demand for each class follows a Poisson process. Inventory is fed by a production system with exponentially distributed build times. We study rationing policies in which the firm either blocks or backlogs orders for the lower priority customers when inventory drops below a certain level. We compare the performance of these rationing policies with a pure first‐come, first‐serve policy under various scenarios for customer response to delay: lost sales, backlog, and a combination of lost sales and backlog.     

A Stochastic Inventory Model With Fast‐Ship Commitments

We present a multiperiod model of a retail supply chain, consisting of a single supplier and a single retailer, in which regular replenishment occurs periodically but players have the option to support fast delivery when customers experience a stockout during a replenishment period. Because expedited shipments increase the supplier's transportation cost, and possibly production/inventory costs, the supplier typically charges a markup over and above the prevailing wholesale price for fast‐shipped items. When fast shipping is not supported, items are backordered if customers are willing to wait until the start of the next replenishment period. We characterize the retailers and the supplier's optimal stocking and production policies and then utilize our analytical framework to study how the two players respond to changes in supply chain parameters. We identify a sufficient condition such that the centralized supply chain is better off with the fast‐ship option. We find a range of markups for fast‐ship orders such that the fast‐ship option is preferred by both the supplier and the retailer in a decentralized chain. However, a markup that is a win–win for both players may not exist even when offering fast‐ship option is better for the centralized chain. Our analysis also shows that depending on how the markup is determined, greater customer participation in fast‐ship orders does not necessarily imply more profits for the two players. For some predetermined markups, the retailer's profit with the fast‐ship option is higher when more customers are willing to wait. However, the retailer may not be able to benefit from the fast‐ship option because the supplier may choose not to support the fast‐ship option when fast‐ship participation increases due to the fact that the fast‐ship participation rate adversely affects the initial order size.     

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.     

Inventory Rationing for Multiple Class Demand under Continuous Review

We consider how a firm should ration inventory to multiple classes in a stochastic demand environment with partial, class‐dependent backlogging where the firm incurs a fixed setup cost when ordering from its supplier. We present an infinite‐horizon, average cost criterion Markov decision problem formulation for the case with zero lead times. We provide an algorithm that determines the optimal rationing policy, and show how to find the optimal base‐stock reorder policy. Numerical studies indicate that the optimal policy is similar to that given by the equivalent deterministic problem and relies on tracking both the current inventory and the rate that backorder costs are accumulating. Our study of the case of non‐zero lead time shows that a heuristic combining the optimal, zero lead time policy with an allocation policy based on a single‐period profit management problem is effective.     

Dynamic Pricing and Inventory Management with Dual Suppliers of Different Lead Times and Disruption Risks

It is common for a firm to make use of multiple suppliers of different delivery lead times, reliabilities, and costs. In this study, we are concerned with the joint pricing and inventory control problem for such a firm that has a quick‐response supplier and a regular supplier that both suffer random disruptions, and faces price‐sensitive random demands. We aim at characterizing the optimal ordering and pricing policies in each period over a planning horizon, and analyzing the impacts of supply source diversification. We show that, when both suppliers are unreliable, the optimal inventory policy in each period is a reorder point policy and the optimal price is decreasing in the starting inventory level in that period. In addition, we show that having supply source diversification or higher supplier reliability increases the firm's optimal profit and lowers the optimal selling price. We also demonstrate that, with the selling price as a decision, a supplier may receive even more orders from the firm after an additional supplier is introduced. For the special case where the quick‐response supplier is perfectly reliable, we further show that the optimal inventory policy is of a base‐stock type and the optimal pricing policy is a list‐price policy with markdowns.     

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.     

Flexible Backup Supply and the Management of Lead‐Time Uncertainty

We consider replenishment decisions for a constant rate demand environment from a supplier with uncertain lead times. We study the potential use of a flexible backup supplier as an emergency response to accurate lead‐time information arriving at (or close after) the beginning of the demand interval and well after an original order with the stochastic lead‐time supplier has been placed. The emergency response decisions involve whether to order and how much from the flexible backup supplier, with the objective of minimizing the cost of meeting demand. We derive the optimal emergency‐response policy and clearly outline its implications on the optimized safety lead time of the original order placement and on the cost of meeting demand. We examine the impact on the use of the flexible backup supplier of factors like the arrival time of accurate lead‐time information and the response lead time of the backup supplier. We further study the potential benefits of the use of the flexible backup supplier in a dual role: as one of the two suppliers in a redundant supply system assigned to originally meet the demand and as an emergency response to later‐arriving lead‐time information. Our numerical studies illustrate the benefits from the use of the flexible backup supplier as an emergency response, but for reasonable purchase premiums and short lead times of flexible backup supply options, their use in a dual (regular and emergency response) role often leads to improved performance over safety lead‐time single and uncertain lead‐time supplier‐replenishment strategies. The benefits of the backup supply options are accentuated the higher the lead‐time uncertainty of the stochastic lead‐time supplier is.     

面向批量订货和多需求类的生产与库存配给

针对一个面向两个需求类的生产企业,根据客户每次订货是否可分批交货,提出了当客户订货可分割和不可分割时供应商的最优生产和库存配给策略.分析表明,供应商的最优生产控制策略可用一个取决于系统状态的基准库存水平表示,最优的库存配给策略则用一个多层的取决于状态的配给水平向量表示.随后,该结论被推广至包含任意多个需求类的生产系统.数值分析验证了文中最优策略的有效性.     

Service at risk in delivery operations

This article examines disruption risks at fulfillment centers and develops risk mitigation strategies based on inventory stocking and delivery decisions. It considers a Fortune 150 firm whose delivery operations are designed to fulfill the orders from contracted business customers within the next day. The firm promises its customers that the probability of late deliveries exceeding a certain threshold will be limited. We coin this requirement as the service-at-risk (SaR) constraint. The firm proactively determines the inventory amount to be kept in each fulfillment center. If a disruption occurs, the firm determines the best way to deliver orders from its operational fulfillment centers and vendors under disruption length and demand uncertainty to minimize additional costs and satisfy the SaR constraint. This article makes four main contributions. First, we find a surprising result that total inventory commitment can decrease with risk aversion when there exists a disruption possibility that impacts two nearby facilities together. Using actual data from the motivating firm, the numerical analysis demonstrates that this phenomenon exists in practice. Second, we define a new metric: The Risk Dispersion Index (RDI), which measures the dispersion in risk exposure across fulfillment centers. It leads to a lower and more balanced risk exposure in the firm's delivery operations. Third, we find that a facility may elect to abandon its own customers to serve the customers of a disrupted facility; this behavior becomes more prominent under risk aversion. Fourth, the introduction of demand uncertainty leads to a smaller inventory commitment for a risk-neutral retailer.     

Unsold Versus Unbought Commitment: Minimum Total Commitment Contracts with Nonzero Setup Costs

We study a minimum total commitment (MTC) contract embedded in a finite‐horizon periodic‐review inventory system. Under this contract, the buyer commits to purchase a minimum quantity of a single product from the supplier over the entire planning horizon. We consider nonstationary demand and per‐unit cost, discount factor, and nonzero setup cost. Because the formulations used in existing literature are unable to handle our setting, we develop a new formulation based on a state transformation technique using unsold commitment instead of unbought commitment as state variable. We first revisit the zero setup cost case and show that the optimal ordering policy is an unsold‐commitment‐dependent base‐stock policy. We also provide a simpler proof of the optimality of the dual base‐stock policy. We then study the nonzero setup cost case and prove a new result, that the optimal solution is an unsold‐commitment‐dependent (s, S) policy. We further propose two heuristic policies, which numerical tests show to perform very well. We also discuss two extensions to show the generality of our method's effectiveness. Finally, we use our results to examine the effect of different contract terms such as duration, lead time, and commitment on buyer's cost. We also compare total supply chain profits under periodic commitment, MTC, and no commitment.     

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.     

The Impact of Modular Assembly on Supply Chain Efficiency

This article studies the impact of modular assembly on supply chain efficiency. In the modular assembly approach, a manufacturer acquires pre‐assembled modules from its suppliers, rather than the individual components, as in the traditional assembly approach. We analyze the competitive behavior of a two‐stage modular assembly system consisting of a manufacturer, and a supplier who pre‐assembles two components into a module. The firms can choose their own inventory policies and we show the existence of Nash equilibrium in the inventory game. Moving from the traditional to the modular approach has a twofold effect on the supply chain. First, we investigate the effect of centralizing the component suppliers. It can be shown that when there is no production time shift, the module supplier always holds more component inventories than suppliers do in the traditional approach, which yields a lower cost for the manufacturer. However, the suppliers, and therefore the supply chain may incur a higher cost in the modular approach. Second, we study the effect of a shift in production time from the manufacturing stage to the supplier stage. From numerical studies, it has been found that such a lead time shift always benefits a centralized supply chain, but not necessarily so for a decentralized system. Combining the two effects, we find that the modular approach generally reduces the cost to the manufacturer and the supply chain, which explains the prevalence of modular assembly from the perspective of inventory management. These results also provide some insight into how firms can improve supply chain efficiency by choosing the right decision structure and lead time configuration.     

Optimal Control of Replenishment and Substitution in an Inventory System with Nonstationary Batch Demand

We study an inventory system in which a supplier supplies demand using two mutually substitutable products over a selling season of T periods, with a single replenishment opportunity at the beginning of the season. As the season starts, customer orders arrive in each period, for either type of products, following a nonstationary Poisson process with random batch sizes. The substitution model we consider combines the usual supplier‐driven and customer‐driven schemes, in that the supplier may choose to offer substitution, at a discount price, or may choose not to; whereas the customer may or may not accept the substitution when it is offered. The supplier's decisions are the supply and substitution rules in each period throughout the season, and the replenishment quantities for both products at the beginning of the season. With a stochastic dynamic programming formulation, we first prove the concavity of the value function, which facilitates the solution to the optimal replenishment quantities. We then show that the optimal substitution follows a threshold rule, and establish the monotonicity of the thresholds over time and with respect to key cost parameters. We also propose a heuristic exhaustive policy, and illustrate its performance through numerical examples.     

Optimizing Customer Forecasts for Forecast‐Commitment Contracts

We study a “Forecast‐Commitment” contract motivated by a manufacturer's desire to provide good service in the form of delivery commitments in exchange for reasonable forecasts and a purchase commitment from the customer. The customer provides a forecast for a future order and a guarantee to purchase a portion of it. In return, the supplier commits to satisfy some or all of the forecast. The supplier pays penalties for shortfalls of the commitment quantity from the forecast, and for shortfalls of the delivered quantity from the customer's final order (not exceeding the commitment quantity). These penalties allow differential service among customers. In Durango‐Cohen and Yano (2006), we analyzed the supplier's problem for a given customer forecast. In this paper, we analyze the customer's problem under symmetric information, both when the customer is honest and when he strategically orders more than his demand when doing so is advantageous. We show that the customer gains little from lying, so the supplier can use his control over the contract parameters to encourage honesty. When the customer is honest, the contract achieves (near‐)coordination of the supply chain in a great majority of instances, and thus provides both excellent performance and flexibility in structuring contracts.     

On Optimal Expediting Policy for Supply Systems with Uncertain Lead‐Times

We examine the role of expediting in dealing with lead‐time uncertainties associated with global supply chains of “functional products” (high volume, low demand uncertainty goods). In our developed stylized model, a retailer sources from a supplier with uncertain lead‐time to meet his stable and known demand, and the supply lead‐time is composed of two random duration stages. At the completion time of the first stage, the retailer has the option to expedite a portion of the replenishment order via an alternative faster supply mode. We characterize the optimal expediting policy in terms of if and how much of the order to expedite and explore comparative statics on the optimal policy to better understand the effects of changes in the cost parameters and lead‐time properties. We also study how the expediting option affects the retailer's decisions on the replenishment order (time and size of order placement). We observe that with the expediting option the retailer places larger orders closer to the start of the selling season, thus having this option serve as a substitute for the safety lead‐time and allowing him to take increased advantages of economies of scale. Finally we extend the basic model by looking at correlated lead‐time stages and more than two random lead‐time stages.     

Integrated Order Scheduling and Packing

We consider an integrated production–distribution scheduling model in a make‐to‐order supply chain consisting of one supplier and one customer. The supplier receives a set of orders from the customer at the beginning of a planning horizon. The supplier needs to process all the orders at a single production line, pack the completed orders to form delivery batches, and deliver the batches to the customer. Each order has a weight, and the total weight of the orders packed in a batch must not exceed the capacity of the delivery batch. Each delivery batch incurs a fixed distribution cost. The problem is to find jointly a schedule for order processing and a way of packing completed orders to form delivery batches such that the total distribution cost (or equivalently, the number of delivery batches) is minimized subject to the constraint that a given customer service level is guaranteed. We consider two customer service constraints—meeting the given deadlines of the orders; or requiring the average delivery lead time of the orders to be within a given threshold. Several problems of the model with each of those constraints are considered. We clarify the complexity of each problem and develop fast heuristics for the NP‐hard problems and analyze their worst‐case performance bounds. Our computational results indicate that all the heuristics are capable of generating near optimal solutions quickly for the respective problems.     

提前期、构建成本和短缺量拖后率均可控的EOQ模型

传统库存模型通常将提前期和构建成本视为不可控制。事实上可以通过追加投资缩短提前期和降低构建成本。缺货期间,为减少订单丢失量和补偿顾客的损失,供应商会给予一定的价格折扣。现实库存系统中,容易得到需求的期望值和标准差,但较难得到其分布规律。基于此,考虑短缺量拖后率与价格折扣和缺货期间库存水平相关,提出了一种需求为任意分布且提前期和构建成本均可控的EOQ模型,证明了模型存在唯一最优解,给出了一种寻优算法。数值仿真分析表明,一般情况下,压缩提前期和降低构建成本能降低订购批量和安全库存,降低库存总成本;短缺量拖后系数和缺货概率对库存总成本影响较大,企业应尽量降低缺货概率,尤其在短缺量拖后系数较小时。