多重参照点、公平偏好和三级供应链协调机制设计

在“单个制造商—单个分销商—单个零售商”三级供应链框架下,考察零售商依赖于多重参照点的公平偏好对于供应链运作造成的偏差,并在此基础上设计一个能够实现供应链整体协调的利润共享组合契约。研究发现:零售商对分销商利润和制造商利润的公平感知影响批发价格和分销价格变动的机制具有差异性;零售商的公平偏好不影响供应链的整体利润,但是会引起利润在各厂商间的重新分配;通过实行一个合理的利润共享组合契约,可以在零售商具有公平偏好的情形下达到供应链全局最优。最后用数值仿真验证了该利润共享组合契约作为协调机制的可行性。     

Pricing and advertisement in a manufacturer–retailer supply chain

We use a game theoretical approach to study pricing and advertisement decisions in a manufacturer–retailer supply chain when price discounts are offered by both the manufacturer and retailer. When the manufacturer is the leader of the game, we obtained Stackelberg equilibrium with manufacturer’s local allowance, national brand name investment, manufacturer’s preferred price discount, retailer’s price discount, and local advertising expense. For the special case of two-stage equilibrium when the manufacturer’s price discount is exogenous, we found that the retailer is willing to increase local advertising expense if the manufacturer increases local advertising allowance and provides deeper price discount, or if the manufacturer decreases its brand name investment. When both the manufacturer and retailer have power, Nash equilibrium in a competition game is obtained. The comparison between the Nash equilibrium and Stackelberg equilibrium shows that the manufacturer always prefers Stackelberg equilibrium, but there is no definitive conclusion for the retailer. The bargaining power can be used to determine the profit sharing between the manufacturer and the retailer. Once the profit sharing is determined, we suggest a simple contract to help the manufacturer and retailer obtain their desired profit sharing.     

规模不经济下基于一致定价和促销努力的双渠道供应链协调策略

在制造商存在规模不经济环境下,分别针对集中决策模式和分散决策模式,建立了基于一致定价和促销努力的双渠道供应链协调策略模型,分析了规模不经济和服务负溢出效应对供应链运营决策的影响,得到了集中和分散决策下各企业最优运作策略和收益。研究指出,规模不经济的双渠道供应链在分散决策批发价契约下无法实现供应链协调;而分散决策网络渠道收益共享契约能够实现双渠道总收益等于集中决策模式下供应链收益,但无法保证各主体始终获得高于批发价合同下的收益;进一步,设计了带有固定补偿的网络渠道收益共享契约,通过对固定补偿值的有效设计,不仅可以保证双渠道总收益等于集中决策模式下供应链收益,且可以始终保证各主体收益不低于分散决策批发价契约下其所得收益,从而实现各主体利益双赢以及供应链的有效协调。     

The implications of postponement on contract design and channel performance

We analyze a supply chain consisting of one manufacturer and one retailer under consignment sales with a revenue sharing contract. The manufacturer produces before, but charges price to sell the products through the retailer after the demand curve is revealed. The retailer deducts a fraction from the selling price for each unit sold and remits the balance to manufacturer. We refer to the capability whereby firms delay price decision and make sales in response to actual market condition as postponement. We find that, when market demand admits a multiplicative structure, the revenue share and allocation of channel profit between the firms when they have postponement capability are similar to when they do not have such capability. Postponement improves the profits of individual firms. Such an effect is more phenomenal in the centralized system than in decentralized system, and when the market demand is more sensitive to price changes. However, it causes the profit loss, defined as the percentage deviation of channel profit in the decentralized system relative to the centralized system, to worsen, and the gap widens with retailer’s sales cost. When the demand has an additive structure, while the roles of postponement on firms’ decisions differ slightly from those under the multiplicative structure, the structure of the strategic interactions between firms and relative channel performance are not significantly altered.     

考虑消费者具有质量和价格偏好的双渠道供应链最优决策

产品价格和质量是消费者永恒的关注点。虽然多渠道给消费者带来了便捷的购物途径, 但是不同渠道的产品存在质量和价格分差异, 消费者在购买时须面对一个渠道、价格和质量的协调选择问题。本文提出了消费者对产品质量和价格偏好的双渠道定价决策模型, 并讨论了以制造商为领导者的分散决策和集中决策情形下的最优策略。比较了消费者偏好及产品质量水平对不同决策情形下的供应链决策的影响, 并通过设计收益共享契约机制实现了渠道的协调并证明了其有效性。研究表明:当产品质量在一定范围内时, 制造商和零售商可以获得最大利润;当消费者对质量的偏好逐渐增加时, 制造商的利润和零售商的利润随着消费者对质量的偏好提高而下降;制造商和零售商可以通过协调销售价格消除供应链的双重边际效应,从而实现供应链的协调。最后利用算例分析了消费者的质量、价格偏好对总利润的影响并给出了相应的管理启示。     

强制减排规制下基于碳减排利润增量分享契约的供应链协调研究

碳减排会增加制造商的成本,导致批发价和零售价提高,从而抑制市场需求。以此为背景,本文针对由一个制造商和一个零售商组成的供应链,研究了强制减排规制下考虑消费者低碳偏好时的供应链决策与协调。通过设计碳减排利润增量分享契约协调制造商和零售商的决策,实现帕累托改进,利用Rubinstein讨价还价模型最终确定减排利润分享比例。研究发现,实施碳减排利润分享契约能有效提高零售商的订货量,并降低批发价格;制造商的利润随着消费者低碳意识提高而提高;当净化率较低时,零售商的利润随消费者低碳意识提高而提高;当净化率较高时,零售商的利润随消费者低碳意识提高而降低;最后,论文通过数值模拟验证了碳减排利润分享契约的有效性。     

A note on channel performance under consignment contract with revenue sharing

Wang et al. [Y. Wang, L. Jiang, Z.J. Shen, Channel performance under consignment contract with revenue sharing. Management Science 50 (2004), 34–47] indicate that a decentralized supply chain cannot be perfectly coordinated. This note provides a cooperative game model that implements profit sharing between the manufacturer and the retailer to achieve their cooperation. When the manufacturer and the retailer are assumed to be risk-neutral, under a very mild restriction on the demand distribution function, the cooperative game model can achieve its unique equilibrium solution in iso-price-elastic or linear demand case. Under the revenue sharing agreement attached with the equilibrium payment scheme, the decentralized supply chain can be perfectly coordinated.     

基于减排成本共担期权契约的供应链协调

考虑消费者具有低碳产品偏好的情况,研究需求随机且受减排影响的期权契约,建立了由单个制造商和单个零售商组成的供应链模型。该模型中制造商处主导地位,零售商处追随地位,制造商首先提出期权契约,零售商购买期权。求解发现,由于传统双重边际化效应的存在,只有当零售价格等于期权执行价格时,才能达到供应链的协调,这时零售商利润为负,不满足参与约束。为此,从降低期权执行价格的角度,对期权契约进行补充,增加了成本共担条款。研究表明,减排成本共担的期权契约能够实现供应链的协调。最后利用算例验证了结论,计算了制造商和零售商利润及零售商分担的减排成本比例随期权价格和期权执行价格的变化情况,并对减排难度系数的敏感性做了分析。     

On channel coordination through revenue-sharing contracts with price and shelf-space dependent demand

This paper deals with the problem of coordinating a vertically separated channel under a consignment contract with revenue sharing. We consider the demand of the downstream player, e.g., the retailer, being price and shelf-space sensitive. Under such a setting, the retailer decides on the revenue-sharing percentage and the slotting fee. And the upstream player, e.g., the manufacturer, decides on the retail price and the size of shelf-space. For each item sold, the retailer deducts an agreed-upon percentage from the selling price and remits the balance to the manufacturer. We model the decision-making of the two firms as a Stackelberg game, and carry out equilibrium analysis for both the centralized and decentralized regimes of the channel, with and without cooperation. In addition, a profit sharing scheme through a two-part slotting allowance is proposed, which leads to Pareto improvements among channel participants. Our analysis reveals that the non-cooperative game tends to set a higher revenue-sharing percentage and lower slotting fee by the retailer, and a higher retail price and less display space by the manufacturer, which leads to a lower channel profit. The consistent bias can be perfectly rectified by the cooperative game through the proposed two-part contractual agreement.     

Pareto analysis of supply chain contracts under satisficing objectives

Supply chain coordination has become critical to firms as increased pressure is placed on them to improve performance. We evaluate the performance of Push, Pull, and Advance-purchase discount (APD) contracts in a manufacturer-retailer supply chain where one or both firms have a satisficing objective of maximizing the probability of achieving a target profit. We identify the resulting operational modes of the supply chain and potential conflicts over the preferred contracts under the Push, Pull, and APD contracts. When both firms are satisficing, conflict over the preferred contract arises when the manufacturer has an ambitious profit target or the retailer has a low profit target. We show that the Push contract can result in a large decrease in the expected profit of a risk-neutral manufacturer when the retailer maximizes the probability of achieving her maximum expected profit. We find that a modified buy-back and profit guarantee contracts can provide significant Pareto improvement over Push or APD contracts when the manufacturer is risk-neutral and the retailer is satisficing, while revenue-sharing contracts cannot. In contrast, revenue sharing and modified buy-back contracts are Pareto dominant under certain conditions when the manufacturer is satisficing and the retailer is risk-neutral.     

期末二次订购下风险规避且促销的收益共享契约协调研究

在期末二次订购下,利用CVaR准则考察收益共享下销售商风险规避且促销的决策问题,并得到一些有意义的管理启示。讨论了风险中性制造商在两生产模式下的生产决策。探讨了收益共享措施的协调问题,分析了各参数的关系,获得如下启示:销售商越是风险规避,首次订购量越少;制造商的首次生产量不一定是首次订购量,在有二次订货情况下可以投机生产来获得额外利润;在收益共享措施下,批发价固定,要风险态度不同的销售商订购等量的商品,风险规避度大的销售商,分享收益的比例小;如果制造商想要收益共享比例增大,那么首次批发价就要降低。     

销售市场和回收市场同时扰动下的闭环供应链协调应对

考虑一个闭环供应链由单个制造商和单个零售商组成,产品的制造和再制造由制造商负责,产品的销售和废旧品的回收由零售商负责。在建立博弈模型的基础上,首先分析了闭环供应链在收益共享契约下的协调性,接着分析了收益共享契约对突发事件下闭环供应链的协调应对。分析结果表明:当突发事件导致销售市场规模和废旧品回收市场初始规模同时发生变化时,闭环供应链的协调将被打破,为此对收益共享契约进行了调整,调整后的收益共享契约使闭环供应链具有抗突发事件性;最后,通过数值计算实例对此进行了验证分析。     

基于流程创新的供应链激励合同研究

针对由一个零售商两个制造商组成的竞争供应链,建立了零售商处于领导地位的Stackelberg博弈模型。分析了收益分享合同和成本分担合同下流程创新效率和竞争强度对流程创新水平和供应链成员利润的影响,并探讨了最优激励合同类型。研究发现,流程创新效率的降低会使得制造商流程创新水平和供应链成员利润降低;竞争强度的增大会使得制造商流程创新水平和供应链成员利润增加。此外,在流程创新效率较高和竞争强度较低时零售商提供收益分享合同有利,在流程创新效率较低和竞争强度较高时零售商提供成本分担合同有利。     

考虑消费者低碳偏好的供应链企业减排成本分摊比较研究

在低碳环境下,研究了单一制造商和单一零售商组成的两级低碳供应链成本分摊决策问题。考虑消费者具有环保意识,因此在购买产品时会考虑产品的碳排放。分别讨论了零售商参与减排成本分摊契约和双方Nash讨价还价成本分摊契约两种形式对碳减排、产品定价和整个供应链及其成员收益的影响。研究发现,在两种契约形式中,零售商都可以实现与制造商共同降低碳排放的目标,从而促进制造商提高碳减排率,提高供应链利润。但是基于Nash讨价还价方式的减排成本分摊契约的供应链绩效高于零售商成本分摊契约下的供应链绩效。同时消费者低碳偏好增加可以激励零售商更多地分摊减排成本,在此基础上,利用Nash讨价还价模型确定了零售商为制造商提供减排成本分摊的比例范围及其最优解。最后,通过数值分析验证了减排因子对不同决策结构的定价、零售商减排分摊比例、供应链利润等决策的影响。     

Contract and product quality in platform selling

More and more e-tailers (platforms) are allowing manufacturers direct access to customers. Two common contracts are offered by platforms to manufacturers: the revenue sharing contract where a platform appropriates a portion of the manufacturer’s revenue, and the fixed fee contract where a platform charges a fixed rent for each sale. Using an analytical model, this paper studies the interrelationship between a platform’s contract choice and a manufacturer’s product quality decision. We find that if product quality is exogenously given, the platform will always adopt the revenue sharing contract. If the manufacturer endogenously decides the quality, however, the platform’s contract choice may be changed. This is because the revenue sharing contract, compared to fixed fee, leads to a lower selling price of the manufacturer, whereas the fixed fee contract can motivate a higher quality than does revenue sharing. As a result, a large (small) market heterogeneity induces the platform to adopt the revenue sharing (fixed fee) contract. We also extend the model to several directions, finding that longer product line, manufacturer competition, lower marginal production cost, and higher platform cost all tend to induce the platform to put forward a fixed fee contract; while if quality decision is less flexible than contract decision, the platform is more ready to embrace revenue sharing. Besides, when there are two platforms competing for the same market, they should differentiate their contract choices so as to mitigate competition.     

两周期零售商竞争下的闭环供应链的定价和协调策略研究

研究了两生命周期零售商竞争环境下的闭环供应链的定价和生产策略:第一个生命周期中,只有一个制造商和一个零售商,制造商利用原材料生产新制造产品;第二个周期中,制造商生产新制造产品的同时利用自己回收的废旧产品生产再制造产品,并且出现了竞争零售商。分别建立了两周期零售商竞争环境下的分散决策模型和集中决策模型,得到了最优定价和生产策略。结果表明:零售商竞争会降低产品的零售价,增加产品的销售量。制造商利用收益共享契约制定合适的批发价和收益共享比率能协调整个闭环供应链,与零售商实现共赢。最后给出了一个算例验证了上述结论。     

考虑零售商保鲜和消费者效用的生鲜农产品供应链协调

针对消费者对生鲜农产品新鲜度要求更高但零售商单独保鲜能力有限的问题,从提高消费效用角度出发,构建了受生鲜农产品新鲜度和价格影响的消费者时变效用函数,建立了由零售商和供应商组成的两级生鲜农产品供应链利润模型,采用Stackberg博弈方法分析了分散式决策下供应商的最优保鲜努力和零售商的最优定价,并同集中式决策下供应链系统的最优决策进行比较。由于分散式决策下零售商的保鲜努力较小,因此给出了能够实现生鲜农产品供应链协调的“保鲜成本分担+收益共享”契约。在此基础上,以同时实现供应链协调和提高消费者整体效用为目标,进一步确定了协调契约所在的区间范围。最后通过算例证明了协调契约的有效性。     

Inventory competition and allocation in a multi-channel distribution system

Consider a supply chain involving one manufacturer and one independent retailer. The manufacturer distributes her product to the end consumer through the independent retailer as well as through her direct channel. Each of the two channels faces a stochastic demand. If one channel is out of stock, a fraction of the unsatisfied customers visit the other channel, which induces inventory competition between the channels. Under the scenario described above, will the manufacturer ever undercut the retailer’s order when the capacity is infinite? What are the equilibria of the game? How does a capacity constraint affect the equilibrium outcome? What is the optimal inventory allocation strategy for the manufacturer? Using a game theoretic model we seek answers to the above questions. Both the capacitated and the infinite capacity games are considered. We establish the necessary condition for a manufacturer to undercut a retailer’s order and show that a manufacturer may deny the retailer of inventory even when the capacity is ample. We show that there can be an equilibrium in the capacitated game where a manufacturer might not use the entire capacity and still deny a retailer inventory. We also show that a mild capacity constraint may make both parties better off and thereby increase the total supply chain profit. We develop a simple yet practical contract called the reverse revenue sharing contract and show that along with a fixed franchise fee this contract can coordinates our decentralized supply chain.     

Supply chain coordination by manufacturer reward contract

We investigate how a manufacturer sets a reward contract to realize supply chain coordination when a retailer's service effort has a showrooming effect. We demonstrate that the manufacturer's reward contract increases retail prices and benefits the retailer but may hurt the manufacturer. Meanwhile, a large unit reward can soften the price competition. We also find that when the unit reward is high, a greater showrooming effect may benefit supply chain members, and the retailer provides a higher service effort.     

风险厌恶下的供应链收益共享契约协调模型研究

收益共享契约是实现供应链系统绩效改善或完美协调的一种机制.考虑了零售商与供应商分别具有风险厌恶决策偏好情况下,在随机市场需求下建立了由单供应商和单零售商组成的二级供应链的收益共享契约模型,并对模型进行了分析,揭示了供应商和零售商的风险厌恶决策偏好对收益共享契约参数的影响.研究结果表明:当销售商(供应商)的风险厌恶控制在...