首页> 外文期刊>Manufacturing and service operations management >Capacity Allocation over a Long Horizon: The Return on Turn-and-Earn
【24h】

Capacity Allocation over a Long Horizon: The Return on Turn-and-Earn

机译:长期内的产能分配:“转弯”收益

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

We consider a supply chain in which a supplier sells products to multiple retailers. When orders from the retailers exceed the supplier's capacity, she must employ an allocation mechanism to balance supply and demand. In particular, we consider a commonly used allocation scheme in the automobile industry: turn-and-earn, which uses past sales to allocate capacity. In essence, retailers "earn" an allotment of a vehicle after they sell one. In contrast to turn-and-earn, fixed allocation ignores past sales and gives each retailer an equal share of the capacity. Earlier work has demonstrated that turn-and-earn-induces more sales in a two-period setting compared to fixed allocation. The question remains unanswered whether turn-and-earn induces similar behaviors over a long horizon when retailers possess private demand information. We construct a dynamic stochastic game of order competition over an infinite horizon to track the order dynamics of the supply chain. We obtain a richer set of equilibrium behaviors than existing models predict. Instead of a symmetric allocation outcome, we observe that sales leadership may arise in equilibrium and that retailers with different past sales adopt distinct ordering strategies to respond to demand uncertainty. Transient sales dynamics suggest that sales leadership may not be persistent and can be eliminated by the occurrence of extremely low demand. This provides a theoretical explanation for several behavioral observations of some U.S. automobile dealers. In addition to the sales-inducing effect, interestingly, turn-and-earn also causes the retailers to absorb local demand variability.
机译:我们考虑一个供应链,其中供应商将产品出售给多个零售商。当零售商的订单超过供应商的能力时,她必须采用分配机制来平衡供需。特别是,我们考虑了汽车行业中一种常用的分配方案:“赚钱”,它使用过去的销售来分配产能。从本质上讲,零售商在售出一辆车后“赚”了一辆车。与营业收入相反,固定分配忽略了过去的销售,并为每个零售商分配了相等的产能份额。较早的工作表明,与固定分配相比,在两个期间的营业额收入可带来更多销售额。当零售商拥有私人需求信息时,在很长的一段时间内,“赚取收益”是否会引起类似的行为,这一问题仍未得到解答。我们构建了一个无限的订单竞争的动态随机博弈,以跟踪供应链的订单动态。我们获得的平衡行为比现有模型预测的要丰富。我们观察到,销售领导地位可能不是均衡分配的结果,而是平衡出现的,过去销售不同的零售商采用不同的订购策略来应对需求不确定性。短暂的销售动态表明,销售领导地位可能不会持久,并且可以通过需求极低而消除。这为一些美国汽车经销商的一些行为观察提供了理论解释。有趣的是,除销售引起的影响外,周转收益还导致零售商吸收本地需求的变化。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号