Innovation in long-term care insurance: Joint contracts for mitigating relational moral hazard

A recent innovation is joint long-term care (LTC) insurance policies covering two related individuals. This contribution purports to find out whether they have the potential of mitigating relational moral hazard (RMH) effects. Intra-family moral hazard has been suspected of being responsible for the sluggish development of private LTC insurance. The parent, anticipating the informal care provided by a family member LTC, is tempted to buy less LTC coverage. The family member (or more generally, the partner of a senior person), knowing that the bequest is protected by LTC insurance, has less incentive to provide informal care. Since a joint LTC policy makes senior and partner decide simultaneously rather than sequentially, it may lead to a partial internalization of RMH effects by turning coverage purchased by the senior and informal care provided by the partner from strategic substitutes into strategic complements under certain conditions.     

On the role of revenue-sharing contracts in supply chains

The supply chain coordinating role of revenue-sharing has, to date, been examined only in static models. With downstream competition, the central conclusion in these models is negative: revenue-sharing cannot, except in degenerate form, achieve coordination. Incorporating dynamics, by allowing inventory carryover in discrete time, this paper establishes a foundation for revenue-sharing contracts in aligning incentives.     

Coordination of supply chains with bidirectional option contracts

In this paper we develop a supply contract for a two-echelon manufacturer–retailer supply chain with a bidirectional option, which may be exercised as either a call option or a put option. Under the bidirectional option contract, we derive closed-form expressions for the retailer’s optimal order strategies, including the initial order strategy and the option purchasing strategy, with a general demand distribution. We also analytically examine the feedback effects of the bidirectional option on the retailer’s initial order strategy. In addition, taking a chain-wide perspective, we explore how the bidirectional option contract should be set to attain supply chain coordination.     

Buyer-supplier currency exchange rate flexibility contracts in global supply chains

This paper analyzes a decentralized global supply chain under a newsvendor setting, where a supplier delivers a certain quantity of a single product to a buyer in accordance with the terms of a mutually agreed upon contract. This contract is signed prior to the delivery of the product and subsequent payment, thus, exposing the supply chain to the risk of currency exchange rate fluctuations. We propose two types of currency exchange rate flexibility contracts to explore the characteristics of exchange rate risk mitigation policies for the buyer and the supplier. Furthermore, we investigate the effects of the contract structures on the optimal order quantity, as well as the expected profits of both supply chain members. Our results show that the optimal order quantity of the buyer decreases when the wholesale price is uncertain due to exchange rate volatility. Also, both our proposed contracts tend to improve the expected profits of both the buyer and the supplier, when the payment is made in the supplier’s currency, indicating the desirability of adopting such contractual agreements from the perspective of both parties. On the other hand, when the payment is made in the buyer’s currency, our suggested contracts do not yield such win-win scenarios. Finally, we examine the effectiveness of availing the services of a local vendor, which is capable of satisfying any demand in excess of the quantity ordered from the foreign source with short notice, in order to mitigate the risks associated with an overseas order.     

Social responsibility allocation in two-echelon supply chains: Insights from wholesale price contracts

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is considered in a two-echelon supply chain consisting of an upstream supplier and a downstream firm that are bound by a wholesale price contract. CSR performance (the outcome of CSR conduct) of the whole supply chain is gauged by a global variable and the associated cost of achieving this CSR performance is only incurred by the supplier with an expectation of being shared with the downstream firm via the wholesale price contract. As such, the key issue is to determine who should be allocated as the responsibility holder with the right of offering the contract and how this right should be appropriately restricted. Game-theoretical analyses are carried out on six games, resulting from different interaction schemes between the supplier and the firm, to derive their corresponding equilibriums. Comparative institutional analyses are then conducted to determine the optimal social responsibility allocation based on both economic and CSR performance criteria. Main results are furnished in a series of propositions and their implications to the real-world business practice are discussed. The key findings are threefold: under the current model settings: (1) the optimal allocation scheme is to assign the supplier as the responsibility holder with appropriate restrictions on the corresponding rights to determine the wholesale price; (2) inherent conflict exists between the economic and CSR performance criteria and, hence, the two maxima cannot be achieved simultaneously; and (3) although integrative channel profit is not attainable, the system-wide profit will be improved by implementing optimal social responsibility allocation schemes.     

Coordination of supply chains by option contracts: A cooperative game theory approach

Manufacturer–retailer supply chains commonly adopt a wholesale price mechanism. This mechanism, however, has often led manufacturers and retailers to situations of conflicts of interest. For example, due to uncertain market demand, retailers prefer to order flexibly from manufacturers so as to avoid incurring inventory costs and to be able to respond flexibly to market changes. Manufacturers, on the other hand, prefer retailers to place full orders as early as possible so that they can hedge against the risks of over- and under-production. Such conflicts between retailers and manufacturers can result in an inefficient supply chain. Motivated by this problem, we take a cooperative game approach in this paper to consider the coordination issue in a manufacturer–retailer supply chain using option contracts. Using the wholesale price mechanism as a benchmark, we develop an option contract model. Our study demonstrates that, compared with the benchmark based on the wholesale price mechanism, option contracts can coordinate the supply chain and achieve Pareto-improvement. We also discuss scenarios in which option contracts are selected according to individual supply chain members’ risk preferences and negotiating powers.     

Call,put and bidirectional option contracts in agricultural supply chains with sales effort

This paper develops option contracts in a supplier-retailer agricultural supply chain where the market demand depends on sales effort. First, we examine a benchmark case of integrated supply chain with the loss rate. Second, we introduce three coordinating option contracts led by the supplier to reduce the retailer's risk, where the call option contract can reduce the shortage risk, the put option contract can reduce the inventory risk and the bidirectional option contract can reduce the bilateral risk. We find that both the optimal initial order quantity and the optimal option quantity increase with the sales effort and the option price will balance the influence of the loss rate on supply chain coordination. Furthermore, the bidirectional option price is the highest while its option quantity is the least, and the put option initial order quantity is the highest. Third, we also consider an option contract led by the retailer to reduce the supplier's wholesale risk. Among the above four option contracts, we find that the option quantity led by the retailer is the highest. Finally, the numerical examples present the impact of the parameters on the optimal decisions, and provide practical managerial insights to reduce the different risk in the agricultural supply chain.     

Coordinating contracts for supply chains that market with mail-in rebates and retailer promotions

Marketing promotions are pervasive in industry, yet too often they are introduced without regard to their potential impact on the whole supply chain. This paper considers a cooperative business environment where a manufacturer and a retailer work interactively in determining their independent sales promotional actions. We use a newsvendor-modelling framework to study coordinating issues when the manufacturer provides mail-in rebates directly to consumers while the retailer exerts promotional effort to further spur consumer demand. We find that quantity discount contracts in conjunction with buy-back achieve supply chain coordination. Successful coordination can result in significant supply chain improvement, which leads the retailer to order more units and exert higher promotional effort level. With numerical examples, we provide additional insights on the conditions for the manufacturer to offer rebates.     

Optimal production and rationing decisions in supply chains with information sharing

This paper considers a two-echelon capacitated supply chain with two non-identical retailers and information sharing. We characterize the optimal inventory policies. We also study the benefits of the optimal stock rationing policy over the first come first served (FCFS) and the modified echelon-stock rationing (MESR) policies.     

Game-theoretic analyses of decentralized assembly supply chains: Non-cooperative equilibria vs. coordination with cost-sharing contracts

This paper considers a multiple-supplier, single manufacturer assembly supply chain where the suppliers produce components of a short life-cycle product which is assembled by the manufacturer. In this single-period problem the suppliers determine their production quantities and the manufacturer chooses the retail price. We assume that the manufacturer faces a random price-dependent demand in either additive or multiplicative form. For each case, we analyze both simultaneous-move and leader–follower games to respectively determine the Nash and Stackelberg equilibria, and find the globally-optimal solution that maximizes the system-wide expected profit. Then, we introduce appropriate buy-back and lost-sales cost-sharing contracts to coordinate this assembly supply chain, so that when all the suppliers and the manufacturer adopt their equilibrium solutions, the system-wide expected profit is maximized.     

Optimal contracts in portfolio delegation

The optimal contracts in portfolio delegation under general preferences are characterized when the underlying state variable is not contractible, and the principal must rely on the final returns of portfolios to design the compensation schemes for the fund manager. We show that the optimal contracts satisfy a second-order nonlinear ordinary differential equation that depends on the utility functions and the distribution of state price density. In general, there is an efficiency loss for the optimal contracts unless the utility functions of both the principal and the agent exhibit linear risk tolerance with identical cautiousness. Additional contractible observables, like stock indexes, can be used to improve the efficiency of the second-best contracts, even if they are not perfectly correlated with the underlying state price. A continuous-time example with power utilities is presented to illustrate the features of the optimal contracts.     

State subsidy and moral hazard in corporate financing

This paper investigates the impact of state subsidy on the behavior of the entrepreneur under asymmetric information. Several authors formulated concerns about state intervention as it can aggravate moral hazard in corporate financing. In the seminal paper of Holmström and Tirole (Q J Econ 112(3):663–691, 1997) a two-player moral hazard model is presented with an entrepreneur initiating a risky scalable project and a private investor (e.g. bank or venture capitalist) providing outside financing. The novelty of our research is that this basic moral hazard model is extended to the case of positive externalities and to three players by introducing the state subsidizing the project. It is shown that in the optimum, state subsidy does not harm, but improves the incentives of the entrepreneur to make efforts for the success of the project; hence in effect state intervention reduces moral hazard. Consequently, state subsidy increases social welfare which is defined as the sum of private and public net benefits. Also, the exact form of the state subsidy (ex-ante/ex-post, conditional/unconditional, refundable/nonrefundable) is irrelevant in respect of the optimal size and the total welfare effect of the project. Moreover, in case of nonrefundable subsidies state does not crowd out private investors; but on the contrary, by providing additional capital it boosts private financing. These results are mainly due to the special mechanism imbedded in our model by which the private investor is able to transform even the badly designed state subsidies into a success fee which is optimal from the incentive point of view.     

Bundling decisions in supply chains

Firms often sell products in bundles to extract consumer surplus. While most bundling decisions studied in the literature are geared to integrated firms, we examine a decentralized supply chain where the suppliers retain decision rights. Using a generic distribution of customers’ reservation price we establish equilibrium solutions for three different bundling scenarios in a supply chain, and generate interesting insights for distributions with specific forms. We find that (i) in supply chain bundling the retailer’s margin equals the margin of each independent supplier, and it equals the combined margin when the suppliers are in a coalition, (ii) when the suppliers form a coalition to bundle their products the bundling gain in the supply chain is higher and retail price is lower than when the retailer bundles the products, (iii) the supply chain has more to gain from bundling relative to an integrated firm, (iv) the first-best supply chain bundling remains viable over a larger set of parameter values than those in the case of the integrated firm, (v) supplier led bundling is preferable to separate sales over a wider range of parameter values than if the retailer led the bundling, and (vi) if the reservation prices are uniformly distributed bundling can be profitable when the variable costs are low and valuations of the products are not significantly different from one another. For normally distributed reservation prices, we show that the bundling set is larger and the bundling gain is higher than that for a uniform distribution.     

Synchronization in supply chains: implications for design and management

Supply chain management literature calls for coordination between the different members of the chain. Materials should be moved from one supplier to the next according to a just-in-time schedule. In this paper, we show that for many supply chain configurations, complete synchronization will result in some members of the chain being ‘losers’ in terms of cost. We develop an algorithm for optimal synchronization of supply chains and provide some guidelines for incentive alignment along the supply chain. In developing the model, we use the economic delivery and scheduling problem model and analyze supply chains dealing with single and multiple components. For single-component supply chains, we derive a closed-form expression for the optimal synchronized cycle time. For multi-component supply chains, we develop an algorithm for finding the optimal synchronized cycle time. We test the performance of the algorithm and show that it provides optimal solutions for a wide range of problems. We illustrate the models with numerical examples.     

Transshipment incentive contracts in a multi-level supply chain

Transshipments within a supply chain can be difficult to implement as the costs and benefits are often incurred by different parties. This difficulty becomes even more problematic when the costs and benefits are not completely known by all parties. The primary purpose of this paper is to introduce the role of asymmetric information into the design of supply chain transshipment contracts. Using a representative supply chain from within the soft drink industry as an example, a multi-level contracting framework is developed that aligns incentives to encourage transshipments and improve performance in the absence of all parties having full information. Analysis of the proposed framework suggests that, even if a transshipment is likely to be unprofitable to the transshipping dyad, it may still be best for the entire supply chain. Moreover, overall supply chain inventories with transshipments do not necessarily increase relative to the no-transshipment case.     

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.     

Cost analysis in global supply chains

This paper aims to explore effect of supply chain members’ costs change on participants of the network. On one perspective, it explores when there is a cost change to a firm, how other firms are affected and who bear(s) the most effect. On the other perspective, it investigates how an individual firm’s performance is affected by the other members in its network and whose cost change would impose a most significant effect on its profit.     

Managing raw material in supply chains

In this paper, we explore how firms can manage their raw material sourcing better by developing appropriate sourcing relationships with their raw material suppliers. We detail three empirical case studies of firms explaining their different raw material sourcing strategies: (a) firms can adopt a hands-off approach to raw material management, (b) firms can supply raw material directly to their suppliers, and this may be beneficial for some agents in the supply chain, and (c) firms can bring their component suppliers together, and the resulting cooperation between suppliers can be beneficial for supply chain. We then analytically model the three raw material scenarios encountered in our empirical work, examine the resulting profits along the supply chain, and extend the results to a competitive buyer scenario. Overall, our results show that active management of raw material sourcing can add value to supply chains.     

Profit allocation games in supply chains

The paper considers a supply chain where a number of agents are connected in some network relationship. Game theory is a very powerful framework for studying decision making problems, involving a group of agents in a supply chain. Allocation games examine the allocation of value among agents connected by a network. The ongoing actions in the supply chain are a mix of cooperative and non-cooperative behavior of the participants. The paper proposes a two-stage procedure for profit allocation based on combination of non-cooperative and cooperative game approaches. In the first stage, retailers meet customer price-dependent stochastic demand and seek to maximize total profit from the sale. Retailers are trying to align goals with producers on a contract basis and share the total profit with them. In the second stage, the cooperating producers allocate individual profits.     

Optimal and robust contracts for a risk-constrained principal

The theory of risk measurement has been extensively developed over the past ten years or so, but there has been comparatively little effort devoted to using this theory to inform portfolio choice. One theme of this paper is to study how an investor in a conventional log-Brownian market would invest to optimize expected utility of terminal wealth, when subjected to a bound on his risk, as measured by a coherent law-invariant risk measure. Results of Kusuoka lead to remarkably complete expressions for the solution to this problem. The second theme of the paper is to discuss how one would actually manage (not just measure) risk. We study a principal/agent problem, where the principal is required to satisfy some risk constraint. The principal proposes a compensation package to the agent, who then optimises selfishly ignoring the risk constraint. The principal can pick a compensation package that induces the agent to select the principal’s optimal choice.