谈判环境下供应链质量合同设计——基于Rubinstein模型

基于Rubinstein谈判模型,探讨了谈判环境下三种类型供应链的质量合同设计,包括供应商-A型分销商(不执行来料检验)、供应商-B型分销商(执行来料检验)及供应商-制造商供应链。分别得到了三种类型的供应链双方讨价还价时能够提供的最优质量合同各参数之间所需满足的关系,以及讨价还价时间间隔趋于0时双方能够提供的最优质量合同各参数之间所需满足的关系。本文给出了谈判理论下供应链质量合同设计研究的方法和途径。     

带有乘积型多目标权函数的调度谈判问题

在供应链环境下的生产活动中,各成员对所辖资源具有独立的支配权,因此需要合理的机制使得协同调度方案得以实施,以提高供应链整体的效率.研究由具备不同讨价还价能力的成员所组成的供应链,建立了以纳什讨价还价公理体系为基础的调度谈判模型.在装配系统中,讨论两供应商关于交付顺序的协商.为求取纳什谈判解,提出了一类新的以多目标乘积项作为目标函数的调度问题.对于单机型供应商,新问题的计算复杂性尚未确定,设计了一种多项式时间的启发式算法以求得近优解,并通过数值算例进行验证.该谈判模型为供应链中各成员提供了一种合理的调度协调机制.     

考虑零售商库存能力约束的供应链网络均衡模型研究

在考虑零售商库存能力约束情形下,研究了多个竞争的零售商与供应商组成的供应链网络均衡问题.通过对供应链各层级的供应商、零售商、消费市场最优性条件的分析,利用变分不等式构建了供应链网络均衡模型.最后,运用投影收缩算法对均衡模型进行求解,并仿真分析了零售商库存能力约束对网络成员及整个供应链网络的影响.     

随机需求下专利供应链的不完全契约设计

企业在授权高技术专利时往往存在诸多不确定性且难以被第三方证实,于是在实践中,不完全专利授权契约及事后的再谈判十分常见.文章构建了随机需求下考虑不完全(专利授权)契约的供应链模型,求解了该模型中各成员的均衡决策.研究发现,与完全契约相比,不完全契约会增加制造商的产量,但专利供应商的专利授权费是否增加,取决于其谈判力的大小.尽管不完全契约提高了整条供应链的利润、消费者剩余和社会福利;但出人意料的是,不论从制造商还是从专利供应商的视角来看,存在再谈判选项的不完全契约并非总是优于完全契约.具体来说,当专利供应商的谈判力较小或较大时,只有一方愿意选择不完全契约;当该谈判力适中时,双方才都愿意选择不完全契约.     

买方抗衡势力对上游企业定价形式决策的影响——基于讨价还价博弈的分析

基于上游垄断、下游双寡头竞争的纵向市场结构,在讨价还价博弈的框架下,构建了下游零售商均无买方抗衡势力和单个零售商具有买方抗衡势力两种情况下的,上游供应商最优定价形式决策模型,分析了买方抗衡势力对供应商定价形式决策的影响。研究发现:从供应商利润角度来说,当零售商均无买方抗衡势力时,两部收费制和RPM(转售价格维持)是等价的,且都优于线性定价;当单个零售商具有买方抗衡势力时,RPM优于两部收费制,同时也优于线性定价,但是两部收费制与线性定价之间的关系不确定。在此结论之上,本文还讨论了政府对RPM采用不同规制政策时,供应商最优的定价形式选择。     

存在水平差异化的多寡头双边平台企业竞争研究

构建了多寡头双边平台企业竞争的Salop双环模型,研究了双边平台企业在不同规模下均衡解的存在性以及均衡解的结构。研究发现:不论双边平台企业规模如何,双边平台企业的收益不仅受平台对买卖双方制定的价格总量的影响,而且还受价格结构的影响;多寡头双边平台企业在竞争中存在明显的买方市场时,买方并不能获得类似单边市场里的主动权,且若卖方存在竞争,则无论买方是否存在竞争,均不存在均衡解;无论是买方竞争还是卖方竞争,若存在均衡解,则对双边平台企业、买方和卖方均有利,出现三方多赢的局面。     

品牌专营下供应链价格和批量联合最优决策

假定需求是价格的函数,首先研究了非品牌专营下供应链的最优价格决策和最优批量决策,然后研究了品牌专营下供应商、零售商价格和批量的最优决策.建立了供应商优先决策的Stackelberg博弈模型,通过求解得到了该博弈问题均衡解,即得到了供应商控制的品牌产品最优零售价格和零售商控制的最优订货批量.最后将该模型应用于一个实例中,比较了非品牌专营下和品牌专营下最优决策的不同和供应链利润的不同,品牌专营提高了供应链整体的利润以及供应商自身利润占整个供应链利润的比例.     

考虑供应商努力水平和风险规避行为的供应链协调机制

利益冲突是影响供应链绩效的重要原因,如何消除供应链冲突、设置合理的协调机制对供应链稳定和可持续发展具有重要的意义.考虑到供应商努力水平和风险规避行为是影响供应链绩效的重要因素,利用博弈论和"均值-方差法",构建一种基于供应商努力水平的主体效用模型,设计了基于增值利润共享的供应链协调机制.结果表明,所设计的机制能够有效地保障供应链主体在利润不受损情形下调动成员合作的积极性与能动性,实现零售商与供应商长期合作和供应链的可持续发展.     

App开发者质量投资和定价策略研究

本文考虑了由两个App开发者和一个下载平台商所构成的二级App供应链,在开发者间存在价格竞争和质量竞争的情况下,区分开发者竞争、开发者合作、供应链集中决策以及混合竞争四种不同的情景,建立了开发者质量投资和定价决策模型,分析了四种情景下开发者的均衡策略,并通过数值仿真进一步探讨了价格竞争程度和质量竞争程度对不同情境下均衡结果的影响。研究表明,高能力开发者的最优质量投资水平以及最优App价格均高于低能力开发者;价格竞争程度和质量竞争程度对非合作情形下的最优策略影响显著,对合作情形下的最优策略影响不显著;此外,App供应链总利润的高低取决于开发者与平台商之间合作的紧密程度。     

基于销售商串货的供应链利润模型

为分析供应商采用数量折扣作为激励机制后,销售商串货对供应链整体利润及成员利润的影响,研究一个供应商和两个销售商组成的供应链,构造销售商无串货和串货两个Stackelberg博弈利润模型,通过模型推导确定供应商和销售商的最优决策,并用数值实验分析折扣率、销售成本与制造成本等参数的变化对无串货和串货两种情形下供应链整体利润差值和成员利润差值的影响.研究结果表明:在一定折扣率区间内串货能同时提高供应链整体利润及成员利润.因此,供应商作为供应链主导方,可通过设置不同折扣率调控销售商的串货行为,实现供应链整体利润及成员利润的提高.     

Bargaining and negative externalities

Two important issues in distributive bargaining theory are, first, the conditions under which a negotiation breakdown occurs, and second, what and how source of parties’ bargaining powers influences the properties of a possible agreement. Research based on classic Nash’s demand game has explored both questions by sophisticating the original game a lot. As an attempt to deal with both issues under a simpler framework, we propose a modification of the Nash demand game in which bargainers suffer negative externalities proportional to the share of the surplus captured by their rival. It is shown that the negotiator experiencing a relatively high externality level has greater bargaining power and thus, appropriates a larger proportion of the surplus at stake. However, if externality levels are sufficiently high, bargaining powers become incompatible and a negotiation breakdown emerges from the bargaining process. We compare our results with the previous literature, and argue that they can be especially relevant in negotiations held under highly polarized environments.     

Bargaining order and delays in multilateral bargaining with heterogeneous sellers

We consider a complete-information multilateral bargaining game in which a single buyer negotiates with two heterogeneous sellers selling perfect complementary units. While bilateral negotiations take place through a sequence of offers and counteroffers, the bargaining order is exogenously given. We solve for the conditions under which (a) the buyer prefers to negotiate with the lower-valuation seller first and (b) efficient (inefficient) outcomes emerge for the two bargaining orders. We find that the buyer prefers to negotiate with the lower-valuation seller first whenever the players are relatively impatient or the sellers are sufficiently heterogeneous. We show that there exists a unique efficient outcome when the buyer negotiates first with the lower-valuation seller and the sellers are sufficiently heterogeneous; however, significant delay in reaching agreements may arise when they are not. In case the buyer bargains with the higher-valuation seller first, an inefficient outcome is shown to exist even when players are extremely impatient.     

Strategic capability investments and competition for supply contracts

Suppliers often make proactive investments to strategically position themselves to win contracts with a large buyer. Such investments reduce the suppliers’ variable costs of serving the buyer’s demand. We show that an auction mechanism does not always benefit the buyer, the supply chain, or the society. We identify scenarios where the buyer can implement the supply chain and socially optimal solution by committing to a bilateral relationship with fair reimbursement, and forgoing the benefits of competition altogether. We explore the role of commitment by the buyer (to a procurement mechanism) and by the suppliers (to an investment level) by analyzing different timing games under symmetric and asymmetric information about suppliers’ types. We show that it never benefits anyone for the suppliers to commit first. Equilibrium investments and cost structures depend upon the buyer’s bargaining power (opportunity cost). However, the winning supplier’s investments are almost always below the supply chain optimal level.     

Reverse auction with buyer-supplier negotiation using bi-level distributed programming

This study presents a framework for solving a sealed-bid, multi-issue, and multi-sourcing reverse auction problem in which negotiation takes place between the buyer and the suppliers during the bidding process. The problem is formulated as a bi-level distributed programming model in which the buyer is the upper level decision maker, while suppliers at the lower level make decisions independent of each other. The negotiation process between the buyer and the suppliers is facilitated via the iterative exchange of decision information between the upper and lower levels of the model. The outcome of the sealed-bid auction is determined using an algorithm designed to establish the optimum quantity allocation and delivery time at the upper level and the corresponding optimized production plans at the lower level. The feasibility of the proposed approach is demonstrated via an illustrative example.     

Stakeholder bargaining games

We study bilateral bargaining problems with an interested third party, the stakeholder, that enjoys benefits upon a bilateral agreement. To address the strategic implications of stakeholders over negotiations, we consider a model where two bargainers interact in the presence of a third party that (a) can transfer a share of her benefits to the bargainers but cannot receive a share of the bilateral surplus, and (b) while she may not participate in all periods of the negotiation, she cannot remain entirely inhibited. Our main findings are:(1) the stakeholder’s (reverse) liquidity constraint implies the existence of a multiplicity of stationary subgame perfect equilibria that include outcomes with very asymmetric bilateral agreements, and (2) the partial participation of the stakeholder may be the source of severe inefficiency     

Pareto-optimal insurance contracts with premium budget and minimum charge constraints

In view of the fact that minimum charge and premium budget constraints are natural economic considerations in any risk-transfer between the insurance buyer and seller, this paper revisits the optimal insurance contract design problem in terms of Pareto optimality with imposing these practical constraints. Pareto optimal insurance contracts, with indemnity schedule and premium payment, are solved in the cases when the risk preferences of the buyer and seller are given by Value-at-Risk or Tail Value-at-Risk. The effect of our constraints and the relative bargaining powers of the buyer and seller on the Pareto optimal insurance contracts are highlighted. Numerical experiments are employed to further examine these effects for some given risk preferences.     

Learning about preferences in electronic negotiations – A volume-based measurement method

To create an integrative solution in a bargaining problem, negotiators need to have information about each other’s preferences. Empirical negotiation research therefore requires methods to measure the extent to which information about preferences is available during a negotiation. We propose such a method based on Starr’s domain criterion, which was originally developed for sensitivity analysis in decision making. Our method provides indices for the amount of preference information that can be inferred both in negotiations reaching an agreement and negotiations where an agreement was not (yet) reached. To test the external validity of our proposed measures, we conduct an empirical study which shows that the proposed measures exhibit positive relationships to the success of negotiations as well as to the efficiency of outcomes that would be expected according to negotiation theory.     

基于混合智能算法的非线性双边多属性谈判模型

在非线性效用函数基础上,运用混合人工智能技术,建立非线性双边多属性谈判模型,给出在一定精度范围内逼近Pareto最优解的近似求解方法.最后通过价格、质量两属性的非线性双边谈判模拟算例,验证了方法的正确性与有效性.为多属性谈判研究提供了新的思路.     

医药产学研联盟创新决策、创新危机与利润分配

以我国医药行业产学研合作创新为现实背景,构建两家相互竞争的制药企业与学研机构的双边纳什议价模型,分析企业的创新价值和议价能力对联盟成员绩效的影响,探讨合作创新对药品价格、企业市场份额、经营绩效和社会福利的影响,研究制药企业创新战略的选择决策及创新对企业可能的危险。通过模型分析,得到如下结论:产学研合作创新能够提高社会总福利,但不一定提高制药企业的绩效和药品的价格;议价能力强的制药企业不一定总是获得高利润,企业最终的利润受到企业自身及竞争者的议价能力、创新价值的共同影响;虽然产品创新能够提高消费者的购买意愿,但盲目跟风创新可能会带来双输的结果。本研究对促进医药行业的产学研合作,提高产学研合作的有效性具有现实意义。