随机需求下考虑公平偏好的合作广告协调模型

在随机需求下,运用Fehr和Schmidt提出的公平偏好理论模型探讨了供应链合作广告协调问题,其中零售商具有利己和利他公平偏好.在批发价格契约下分析了零售商的公平偏好对订购和广告策略及渠道协调的影响,结果表明:除了一个测度为零的空间之外,批发价格契约不能协调供应链.设计了能协调供应链的收益共享和广告成本分担契约,并刻画了要完成渠道协调,契约参数须满足的充要条件.研究表明:1)在零售商具有利己公平偏好下,收益共享契约虽能协调供应链,但不能实现渠道收益的任意分配;2)若零售商的利他公平偏好较强,则能协调供应链(实现供应链期望利润最大化)的契约未必是帕累托最优契约,能实现公平分配的协调契约才是最优契约;3)在渠道协调下,零售商的利己和利他公平偏好对其效用均有负面影响.最后利用数值分析验证了相关结论.     

公平关切下零售商主导的供应链决策及协调模型

研究公平关切下由一个制造商和一个主导零售商构成供应链的决策及协调问题,当零售商公平关切时,分析了制造商和主导零售商的最优决策以及供应链系统的协调策略。研究表明在零售商主导的供应链系统中,无论零售商是否公平关切,批发价格契约均不能协调供应链系统。零售商的最优零售价格以及最大效用值,在一定条件下,与其公平关切系数无关。零售商公平关切下,收益共享契约和数量折扣契约均可以协调供应链系统,且协调条件均仅与零售商的渠道能力有关,而与其公平关切系数无关。     

公平偏好下双渠道供应链最优定价策略与协调

在市场需求是一种依赖于销售价格的线性结构下,建立由一个制造商和一个零售商组成的两级双渠道供应链模型.在改进收入共享契约下,分别针对零售商不利不公平厌恶和有利不公平厌恶两种情形,探讨公平偏好对双渠道供应链最优定价策略及契约协调性的影响.研究表明,最优零售价格随零售商不利不公平厌恶偏好增大而减小,随其有利不公平厌恶偏好增大而增大;最优直销价格不受零售商公平偏好影响,制造商始终完全占有直销渠道的销售收入;最优批发价格大小与零售商收入共享比例和公平偏好程度有关;改进收入共享契约仅在零售商不利不公平厌恶偏好下能够实现双渠道供应链协调.     

双渠道供应链中合作广告与定价的动态模型

基于单个制造商与单个零售商所组成的双渠道供应链结构,利用微分对策方法,分别考察了动态架构中Stackelberg博弈与合作博弈情形下渠道成员的最优定价和广告策略,并对此两种博弈结构下的反馈均衡结果进行了分析比较.研究发现,两种博弈相比,制造商的直销价格相同,零售商在合作博弈下选择更小的零售价格;制造商在合作博弈下对广告的投入更多,而零售商在两种博弈下的广告投入水平取决于零售商的广告竞争强度与两个渠道销售价格竞争强度的关系;两种博弈下供应链系统利润的大小关系依赖于系统参数.     

基于品牌和促销广告的闭环供应链模型

研究了考虑广告投入的闭环供应链的协调问题,建立了制造商品牌广告投入和零售商地方促销广告投入共同影响市场需求的闭环供应链模型,分别给出在集中决策和分散决策下制造商的最优品牌广告投入努力,零售商最优地方促销广告投入努力及制造商的最优回收率和最优批发价格,利用特许经营契约使闭环供应链系统达到协调,并且通过数值对模型进行了仿真计算.     

需求依赖价格、广告投人和质量控制的供应链模型

研究了需求受零售商销售价格和广告投入以及制造商质量控制影响的供应链协调问题,分析了零售商的广告投入以及制造商的质量控制对市场需求的影响,分别给出了集中决策和分散决策下零售商的最优销售价格、最优订购量和最优广告投入努力水平以及制造商的最优质量控制努力水平和最优批发价格,利用了特许经营契约来使供应链达到完美协调.最后,通过数值算例对模型进行仿真计算与分析.     

考虑权力结构的产品服务供应链服务渠道选择及协调研究

在制造业服务化转型过程中,传统的产品供应链转变为了产品服务供应链,为顾客提供产品和服务,服务可以由制造商或零售商提供,权力结构会对服务渠道的选择产生影响。本文通过建立博弈模型,研究了制造商为核心、零售商为核心以及制造商与零售商权力均等三种权力结构下最优服务渠道的选择问题,并应用两部定价契约对最优服务渠道的结果进行协调。研究发现,当制造商为核心时,最优的服务渠道为零售商提供服务,当零售商为核心时,最优的服务渠道为制造商提供服务,当制造商与零售商权力均等时,不存在最优的服务渠道。两部定价契约可以实现最优服务渠道的协调,最后通过数值仿真对结论进行了验证。     

基于提前订货折扣和延期支付契约的双渠道供应链运作策略研究

在随机需求环境下, 构建了四种不同情形下零售商和双渠道制造商利用契约机制进行竞争的供应链决策模型, 并给出了各情形下供应链成员最优决策和利润。研究发现, 相对于供应链无任何契约情形, 双渠道供应链中各主体均提供契约来增加自身需求和利润的策略并非始终是有效的, 一定条件下供应链各主体利润均受损。当供应链中仅零售商为下游顾客提供提前订货折扣契约, 而制造商不提供任何契约时, 供应链各主体利润均达到最大。因而, 对双渠道制造商来说, 当零售商采用一定契约策略增大其渠道需求并降低制造商网络渠道需求时, 制造商最优的策略并非是采用“敌对”的契约策略来进一步增加自身网络渠道需求, 而是采用“搭便车”策略, 不为下游顾客提供任何契约优惠, 而从零售商渠道获得更多批发收益, 并最终实现自身总收益的最大化。     

收益共享契约下闭环双渠道供应链应急协调

双渠道供应链中存在一个制造商和一个零售商,零售商拥有传统渠道,制造商拥有电子渠道,回收可以再制造的产品,当供应链系统稳定时给出了最优价格、渠道销售数量和回收率.当供应链面临着需求扰动,制造商在一定范围内不用调整生产计划,回收率和需求突变程度负相关,平稳状态时的契约将无法协调供应链,改进收益共享契约能够协调需求扰动下的闭环双渠道供应链.     

需求信息不对称下双渠道供应链的协调

基于报童模型,研究了由一个制造商与一个零售商组成的双渠道供应链在需求信息不对称条件下的契约协调问题,分别得到了离散和连续两种需求类型下的最优回购契约,并分析了最优回购契约对供应链的协调绩效.     

广告分担、价格折扣与供应链的纵向合作广告

研究了生产商和零售商的纵向合作广告问题。分别在广告分担和价格折扣策略下，探讨了双方的均衡结果和利润。当生产商的边际利润较小时，生产商的最优决策是不采取任何一种策略。当生产商的边际利润达到一定范围时，广告分担策略是双方共同的最优选择。而无论在什么样的条件内，价格折扣策略都不会使双方同时满意。为了增加双方的收益，供应链成员应该在广告上集成决策。最后给出了系统集成的可行最优解的范围和Nash讨价还价解。     

风险中性零售商的合作广告策略与订货模型

考虑了由一个制造商与一个零售商构成的单期二阶段供应链是否进行合作广告的博弈问题.面对市场需求的不确定性,零售商从制造商处订购报童类型产品销售给消费者,零售商具有风险中性的行为特征.通过不合作广告与合作广告两种情形,制造商与零售商进Stackelberg主从博弈,得到了均衡解,比较后发现,合作广告下的最优解及利润总是优于不合作广告下的最优解和利润,告诉了上下游企业采用合作广告的广告策略.最后,通过数值算例,给出了需求敏感系数对最优决策的影响,同时也论证了有关结论.     

Supply chain coordination through integration of innovation effort and advertising support

This study integrates firms’ innovation and advertising decisions in a two-echelon supply chain, where a monopoly manufacturer sells products to ultimate consumers through an autonomous retailer. Considering that both innovation and advertising contribute to the product demand, we first investigate the optimal equilibriums of channel members under two different game structures: the non-cooperative and cooperative. In the non-cooperative structure, the manufacturer controls the innovation effort and wholesale price while the retailer controls the advertising rate and retail pricing. In the cooperative structure, the manufacturer agrees to share part of retailer’s advertising expenditure. We find that both the optimal operation and marketing decisions are sensitive to effects of innovation and advertising on demand as well as the manufacturer’s cost reduction coefficient due to innovation. Further, we find that the manufacturer always prefers cooperation. Meanwhile, only when the firms’ investments significantly contribute to the market mechanism, does the retailer have incentive to implement a cooperative program. In addition, we further propose a new two-way subsidy policy to coordinate channel members’ business functions.     

A game theoretic approach to coordinate pricing and vertical co-op advertising in manufacturer-retailer supply chains

Vertical cooperative (co-op) advertising is a marketing strategy in which the retailer runs local advertising and the manufacturer pays for a portion of its entire costs. This paper considers vertical co-op advertising along with pricing decisions in a supply chain; this consists of one manufacturer and one retailer where demand is influenced by both price and advertisement. Four game-theoretic models are established in order to study the effect of supply chain power balance on the optimal decisions of supply chain members. Comparisons and insights are developed. These embrace three non-cooperative games including Nash, Stackelberg-manufacturer and Stackelberg-retailer, and one cooperative game. In the latter case, both the manufacturer and the retailer reach the highest profit level; subsequently, the feasibility of bargaining game is discussed in a bid to determine a scheme to share the extra joint profit.     

供应链互补产品广告投入和捆绑销售联合决策研究

以一个制造商和一个零售商的供应链为研究对象,制造商生产两种互补产品,零售商可选择分开或捆绑两种销售策略。考虑互补品的负交叉弹性和广告外部性的特点,构建基于溢出效应的需求模型,运用博弈论的方法,求解零售商采取分开和捆绑两种销售策略时的均衡结果。通过比较不同销售策略下的均衡结果及利润关系,探讨在分散式和集中式两种情况下,零售商的最优广告投入和捆绑销售的联合决策问题。最后,通过数值算例,讨论产品互补程度和广告成本系数对决策结果的影响。研究结果表明,无论是在分散式还是集中式决策下,当产品互补程度较高或广告成本系数低时,分开销售是占优策略而广告费用较高;当产品互补程度较低且广告成本系数高时,捆绑销售是占优策略且广告费用较低。     

Coordination of cooperative advertising in a two-level supply chain when manufacturer offers discount

We studied the coordination of cooperative advertisement in a manufacturer–retailer supply chain when the manufacturer offers price deductions to customers. With a price sensitive market, the expected demand with cooperative advertising and price deduction is demonstrated. When the manufacturer is a leader, we obtained the optimal national brand name investment, local advertisement and associated manufacturer’s allowance with any given price deduction. When the manufacturer offers more price deduction to customers, the retailer will increase local advertisement if the manufacturer provides the same portion of the local advertising allowance. We obtained the necessary and sufficient condition for the price deduction to ensure an increase of manufacturer’s profit, and a search procedure for determining such an optimal price deduction is provided as well. When the manufacturer and retailer are partners, we obtained the optimal national brand name investment and local advertisement. For any given price deduction, the total profit for the supply chain with cooperative scheme is always higher than that with the non-cooperative scheme. When price elasticity of demand is larger than one, the resulting closed form optimal price deduction with partnership is also obtained. To increase profits for both parties in a supply chain, we recommend that coordination in local and national cooperative advertising with a partnership relationship between manufacturer and retailer is the best solution. The bargaining results show how to share the profit gain between the manufacturer and the retailer, and determine the associated pricing and advertising policies for both parties.     

A Game-Theoretic Analysis for Coordinating Cooperative Advertising in a Supply Chain

In this paper, we investigate the coordination of cooperative advertising decisions in a supply chain with one manufacturer and one retailer. The manufacturer and the retailer invest in national and local advertising, respectively. The manufacturer also agrees to share part of the total local-advertising costs with the retailer. The model is analyzed using game theory. We also compare the results of our analysis with similar results from the literature developed for cooperative advertising.     

Channel Coordination with Cooperative Advertising Considering Effect of Advertising on Willingness to Pay

In this paper, cooperative advertising in a manufacturer–retailer supply chain is studied. Advertising can enhance willingness to pay (WTP) of customers. This trade-off between the benefits of increasing WTP of customers and the advertising expenditure is a key to understanding the retailers optimal advertising decision. On the other hand, it is interesting to understand in which condition supporting the retailer for his advertising expenditure is beneficial for the manufacturer. In this study, in order to capture pricing and advertising strategies of the channel member, three non-cooperative games including Nash, Stackelberg retailer and Stackelberg manufacturer game-theoretic models are established. In spite of the related studies which restrict price in order to prevent negative demand, the proposed model allows channel members to increase their prices by enhancing WTP of customers. In this study, contrary to similar additive form demand functions applied in the co-op ad literature which limits their studies for cases that profit function is concave with respect to variables, optimal prices and advertising strategies are obtained for all the solution space. Surprisingly for the very high values of the advertising effect coefficient, a finite optimal advertising expenditure is achieved.     

Retail competition and cooperative advertising

We consider a cooperative advertising channel consisting of a manufacturer selling its product through a retailer in competition with another independent retailer. The manufacturer subsidizes its retailer’s advertising only when a certain threshold is positive. Moreover, the manufacturer’s support for its retailer is higher under competition than in its absence.     

Co-op advertising models in manufacturer–retailer supply chains: A game theory approach

In the literature of cooperative (co-op) advertising, the focus of 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 structure reviews have shown a shift of retailing power from manufacturers to retailers. Retailers have equal or even greater power than a manufacturer when it comes to retailing. Based on this new market phenomenon, we intend to explore the role of vertical co-op advertising efficiency with respect to transactions between a manufacturer and a retailer through brand name investments, local advertising expenditures, and sharing rules of advertising expenses. Three co-op advertising models are discussed which are based on two noncooperative games and one cooperative game. In a leader–follower noncooperative game, the manufacturer is assumed to be a leader who first specifies the brand name investment and the co-op subsidization policy. The retailer, as a follower, then decides on the local advertising level. In a noncooperative simultaneous move game, the manufacturer and the retailer are assumed to act simultaneously and independently. In a cooperative game, the system profit is maximized for every Pareto efficient co-op advertising scheme, but not for any other schemes. All Pareto efficient co-op advertising schemes are associated with a single local advertising level and a single brand name investment level, but with variable sharing policies of advertising expenses. The best Pareto efficient advertising scheme is obtained taking members' risk attitudes into account. Utilizing the Nash bargaining model, we discuss two situations that (a) both members are risk averse, and (b) both members are risk neutral. Our results are consistent with the bargaining literature.