进口汽车分销中的供应链渠道治理

本文分析中国进口汽车供应链分销渠道中的一些现象并分析其存在的问题,找出渠道脆弱性因素所在．利用合作博弈论、信用管理、渠道激励对进口汽车供应链分销渠环节进行一定治理,提高供应链健壮性,使得汽车供应链中的分销渠道能够有效运作。     

直销模式对存在强势零售商零售渠道的影响

在传统的零售渠道中,制造商不仅通过弱势的中小零售商同时也通过强势的大型零售集团进行销售,大型零售集团在整条供应链的博弈中往往享有更大的权力.随着网络经济的兴起,越来越多的制造商可以通过直销模式来重塑自身的零售渠道,进而在供应链中获得更大的利润.研究主要集中在两个方面:1)制造商的直销模式如何影响存在强势零售集团的零售渠道;2)满足何种条件,制造商可以通过直销模式提高自身的利润.     

电子零售渠道的建立对各方收益的影响研究

针对以往研究很少考虑厂商间横向竞争的不足,研究了某一厂商增加电子零售渠道对自身、竞争对手以及零售商收益的影响。取得以下3点主要结论:①厂商要在产品相似度较高、电子零售渠道占有率较大的情况下开展电子零售才能提高自身收益,否则反而会降低收益;而且产品相似度和电子零售渠道占有率越高,则厂商收益增加得越多,但渠道替代度的增加会导致其收益增幅的降低。②对竞争对手,其他厂商开展电子零售总会使其收益降低,但电子零售渠道占有率的变化不会令其损失有明显变化,而且产品相似度的增加还会降低其损失。③对零售商,厂商开展电子零售总会令其收益降低,而且产品相似度、电子零售渠道占有率和渠道替代度这3个因素的提高会加剧其收益下降的速度。     

房屋租赁市场中租金的确定方法研究

随着我国房地产市场的重要组成部分房屋租赁市场的发展,加强租赁市场管理、理顺房屋租赁中的各方经济利益关系已成为急待解决的问题,而房屋租赁价格的确定是经济问题的核心.本文通过对租赁价格性质、构成要素、影响因素及估价原则的认识,对各种房屋租赁价格的估价方法进行了探讨,最后对各方法进行述评并指出实践中应注意的问题.     

回收模式对制造商渠道入侵策略的影响

  电子商务和互联网的发展导致企业销售模式发生改变,直销渠道入侵作为一种有效的竞争手段被越来越多的制造商采用。影响制造商渠道入侵策略选择的因素有多个方面,很多学者从不同角度分析供应链中制造商的渠道选择策略,但在闭环供应链背景下关于产品再制造对制造商渠道入侵策略选择影响的分析还非常有限。         基于闭环供应链中制造商回收模式选择的不同,研究制造商回收和零售商回收两种模式下制造商渠道入侵决策及对零售商、供应链系统和消费者剩余的影响。运用Cournot模型刻画直销与传统零售渠道之间的竞争行为,建立两种回收模式下制造商渠道入侵决策模型,并得到均衡结果。利用算例分析不同回收模式下制造商渠道入侵对供应链利润和消费者剩余的影响。         研究结果表明,①无论制造商是否进行渠道入侵,制造商回收模式对制造商、闭环供应链系统和消费者均更有利,而零售商回收模式下的利润更高。②如果传统零售渠道的成本优势足够大,制造商的渠道入侵行为使零售商受益。③当回收量不受需求量约束时,两种回收模式下制造商最优渠道入侵策略相同;当回收量受需求量约束时,制造商回收模式下制造商渠道入侵能带来更高的增量利润,但零售商回收模式下制造商受益于渠道入侵的区间更大,且制造商渠道入侵对零售商更有利。         回收模式是影响制造商渠道入侵决策的重要因素,研究结果为闭环供应链中制造商的渠道选择决策提供帮助,并能为政策制定者提供借鉴和决策参考,在制定相关回收政策时应综合考虑回收模式与制造商渠道入侵之间的内在关系。     

基于B/S结构的汽车租赁风险控制与运营管理系统的设计与实现

针对我国汽车租赁企业的信息化需求,本文提出了汽车租赁风险控制与运营管理信息化解决方案。本文构建的汽车租赁管理信息系统不仅强调运营层的流程化管理,更把企业资金的运作管理作为重中之重,把资金成本、车辆效益、投资回报等真正反映公司经营状况的指标联系起来,以便帮助企业在车辆管理和资金管理等方面做出科学决策。     

双渠道零售商和传统零售商的定价策略

在单制造商和两个具有竞争行为零售商的供应链系统中,本文研究了双渠道零售商和传统零售商的定价决策问题。首先,在零售商间进行Stackelberg博弈假设前提下,分别针对双渠道零售商和传统零售商作为领导者的情况,构建了两种模式下的零售商定价决策模型,给出了零售商的最优定价策略;其次,分析了零售商在特定情形下的定价策略;最后,用数值算例分析了模型参数对最优结果的影响。通过对比研究和数值算例分析发现:对于零售商来说,作为Stackelberg的领导者时的总利润要比作为追随者时的总利润大;对于供应商而言,传统渠道的零售商做主导者时的总利润要比双渠道零售商做主导者时的总利润大。     

渠道权力结构对供应链协同效应影响研究

借鉴营销中的渠道权力概念,通过对供应链中制造商和零售商的相互权力进行AHP评价,形成制造商和零售商渠道权力结构组合,并对应于供应链伙伴关系的4种典型组合;从战略层、职能层和作业层3个维度,利用三角模糊数评价方法重建供应链协同效应评价体系;以实证分析的方法验证基于渠道权力而形成的供应链伙伴关系的4种典型组合与供应链协同效应的关系.实证结果表明,在供应链协同效应方面双核心型供应链优于制造商主导型供应链,制造商主导型供应链优于零售商主导型供应链,零售商主导型供应链优于低度均衡型供应链,并在此基础上分析不同组合的供应链协同效应差别的原因与提高的途径.     

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.     

Strategic Information Sharing in Competing Channels

We investigate strategic information sharing in two competing channels. The retailer in a channel can ex post decide whether to share private demand information with his upstream manufacturer after the content of information becomes known. We find that a retailer discloses low demand and withholds high demand to induce lower wholesale prices from his manufacturer. We show that a retailer should share less information when the retail market becomes more competitive, but should disclose more information when his capability to acquire information improves. When a decentralized supply chain competes with an integrated channel, we show that firms in the supply chain benefit from the rival channel's effort to improve information capability, that the incentive for the retailer in the supply chain to improve his information capability increases with the intensity of competition and with the rival channel's information capability, and that the retailer may not want to pursue perfect information acquisition even when doing so is costless. Extensive numerical studies demonstrate that similar results also hold for two decentralized supply chains competing with each other.     

混合渠道下2-2 可替代品供应链中交叉选择及均衡分析

在不同批发价格策略下探讨产品间可替代程度对供应链交叉选择的影响。选择由两个制造商和两个零售商构成的供应链为研究对象,分别探讨了制造商向零售商提供统一批发价格和实施批发价格歧视时混合渠道中的交叉选择及均衡结果。研究结果表明,当制造商向零售商提供统一批发价格,产品间可替代性低时,交叉选择将会发生。产品间可替代性高时,制造商倾向于采用单一的销售渠道,交叉选择将不会发生;当实施批发价格歧视时,产品间的替代性低时,双向交叉选择将成为均衡的结果;采用分散销售渠道的制造商不会仅选择集成销售渠道中的零售商。最后,用实例分析验证了研究结论。     

Motivating Retail Marketing Effort: Optimal Contract Design

We study a distribution channel where a manufacturer relies on a sales agent for selling the product, and for investing in the most appropriate marketing effort. The agent's effort is hard to monitor. In addition, the cost of effort is the agent's private information. These impose challenges to the manufacturer in its endeavor to influence the agent's marketing effort provisions and to allocate profit between the two parties. We propose two contract forms. The franchise fee contract is a two‐part price schedule specifying a variable wholesale price and a fixed franchise fee. The retail price maintenance contract links the allowed retail price that the agent charges customers with total payment to the manufacturer and sales level. Under information asymmetry, for implementing either contract form, the manufacturer needs to offer a menu of contracts, hoping to invoke the “revelation principle” when the agent picks a certain contract from that menu. We show that the two contract forms perform differently, and each party's preference toward a particular contract form is linked with the total reservation profit level and/or the sales agent's cost type. We provide managerial guidelines for the manufacturer in selecting a better contract form under different conditions.     

考虑退货风险的制造商双渠道供应链定价决策研究

针对事前不确定性导致的退货问题,从消费者行为出发,建立考虑定价差异和退货风险双重因素的市场需求函数,通过Stackelberg博弈模型研究四种不同市场需求情形在不同定价模式下双渠道供应链的最优决策。在数值仿真部分,对不同情形决策之间比较、供应链收益进行比较分析。研究表明：电子渠道销售价格与电子渠道的市场基本需求成正比,批发价和传统渠道销售价格与传统渠道的市场基本需求成正比,实体店体验服务水平和传统渠道的市场基本需求的关系（线性关系）则根据某些条件而定;退货风险对供应链决策的影响与定价模式、市场需求影响因素相关;制造商偏好于定价不相等模式,零售商偏好于定价相等模式;退货风险与定价差异对供应链成员收益的影响与定价模式相关,对整体供应链收益的影响与定价模式和退货率大小有关。     

Strategic Sourcing in the Presence of Uncertain Supply and Retail Competition

This study develops an analytical model to evaluate competing retail firms' sourcing strategies in the presence of supply uncertainty. We consider a common supplier that sells its uncertain supply to two downstream retail firms engaging in price competition in a horizontally differentiated product market. The focal firm has a dual‐sourcing option, while the rival firm can only source from the common supplier. We assess the system‐wide effects of supply uncertainty on the focal firm's incentive to pursue the dual‐sourcing strategy. We find that the focal firm's dual‐sourcing strategy can create a win–win situation that leads to increased retail prices and expected profits for both firms. Furthermore, under certain conditions, we show that it is beneficial for the focal firm to strategically source from the common supplier, even if its alternative supplier offers a lower wholesale price. Overall, we identify two types of incentives for adopting the dual‐sourcing strategy: the incentive of mitigating supply risk through supplier diversification and the incentive of strategic sourcing for more effective retail competition.     

成本信息不对称下零售商主导的混合渠道供应链决策分析

为研究零售商作为Stackelberg领导者的供应链中制造商的成本信息谎报行为对供应链的影响,本文建立了一条由一个共同零售商主导的包含一个拥有双渠道的制造商和一个仅拥有分销渠道的制造商的混合渠道供应链。首先讨论了供应链成员在制造商成本信息不对称情况下的最优定价问题和制造商追求自身利润最大时的最优谎报因子。然后将两制造商均谎报成本信息、其中一个制造商谎报成本信息与完全信息情况作比较,分析谎报策略对供应链的影响,并用算例通过MATLAB进行了仿真。结果表明:制造商为追求自身利润最大化将高报成本信息,且不同制造商的最优谎报因子与交叉价格敏感度和成本的关系不同;不同渠道结构的制造商谎报成本信息会对供应链造成不同的影响,且影响与顾客对商品价格敏感性有关;制造商谎报成本信息在特定情况下对某些成员有利,但对供应链整体始终不利。这些结论可以为混合渠道供应链中的参与者提供决策依据,提高供应链的效益。     

On the Effects of Capacity Agent on Market Equilibrium

We consider a setting of two firms and one capacity agent. Each firm serves a primary market, and the capacity agent sustains a common market to draw demand for capacity from the external firms. The firms can partner with the capacity agent under her contract to serve the common market. When they use the common market mainly as an outlet for their unused capacities, the capacity agent will only specify a variable fee for each capacity unit deployed through her, and prefer to partner with one firm in most circumstances. When the firms adjust capacities to accommodate the businesses created by serving the common market, the capacity agent will specify a lump‐sum payment and a variable fee, and will be more likely to incentivize only one firm to partner with her, when the common market is sufficiently large or the demands in the common and primary markets are strongly correlated. She will always use a fixed fee to extract, while not necessarily all, the profit gains to the firms serving the common market, but will use a variable fee only when partnering with both firms. The key results are robust with respect to market configuration and contract type.     

政府规制下混合渠道销售/回收的电器电子产品闭环供应链决策

针对混合渠道销售及回收的电器电子产品闭环供应链(CLSC),考虑当前我国实施的WEEE规制政策的影响,建立CLSC决策模型,并基于博弈分析方法求得政府规制工具的最优参数和CLSC中各成员企业的最优经营策略及利润,以及社会福利和消费者剩余。结果表明:政府向电器电子产品制造商征收的WEEE处理基金越高,则产品批发价、直销价和分销价均越高;政府给予WEEE处理商的处理补贴越高,则各WEEE回收企业的回收价格及回收量均越高;消费者环保意识越高以及对WEEE回收价越敏感,都越有助于各回收企业增加WEEE回收量,提高CLSC各成员企业的利润,以及促进社会福利和消费者剩余的增加;消费者对产品分销价与直销价的价格差越敏感,则对制造商和销售商的利润、社会福利以及消费者剩余越无益,但不影响第三方回收企业和处理企业的利润。     

The Value of Category Captainship in the Presence of Manufacturer Competition

This research investigates the value of category captainship (a management practice in which a retailer relies on a manufacturer for recommendations regarding strategic category management decisions) in retail supply chains. We consider a setting where the scope of category management is limited to assortment decisions and demand enhancing activities. We assume that the retailer selects a category captain among multiple competing manufacturers with privately known capabilities for driving category traffic. First, we consider a benchmark scenario where the retailer is responsible for category management. Then, we consider the category captainship scenario where the retailer selects one of the manufacturers as a captain to manage the category. We find that captainship is more likely to emerge in categories where the cost of managing variety, the retail margins, and the competition for captainship are moderate and the captain is more capable of driving traffic compared to the retailer. In such categories the collaboration between the retailer and the captain ensures sufficient surplus for both parties. Finally, we show that captainship can also benefit the non‐captain manufacturers.