Strategic Inventories in Competitive Supply Chains Under Bargaining

L. Chen, Weijia Gu, Qinshen Tang
{"title":"Strategic Inventories in Competitive Supply Chains Under Bargaining","authors":"L. Chen, Weijia Gu, Qinshen Tang","doi":"10.1287/msom.2020.0223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Problem definition: Strategic inventory refers to the inventory held by firms purely out of strategic considerations other than operational reasons (e.g., economies of scale). In this paper, we investigate the roles of strategic inventory in a system with two parallel supply chains under both full bargaining and partial bargaining, which differ in whether inventory is included in the bargaining terms. Methodology/results: (i) Under full bargaining, horizontal competition can induce an asymmetric equilibrium, whereby only one of the chains carries strategic inventory and benefits from it when the holding cost is small. The whole system, however, is worse off. (ii) Under partial bargaining, regardless of whether there is horizontal competition, the retailer in a supply chain always carries inventory when his bargaining power is small and the inventory holding cost is low. Furthermore, with horizontal competition, inventory hurts (improves) the system performance when the inventory holding cost is small (above a threshold and not too big). (iii) Full bargaining can be inferior to partial bargaining when there is horizontal competition. Managerial implications: The conventional wisdom about strategic inventory should be taken with caution. Specifically, the traditional role of strategic inventory empowering the retailer in a supply chain is completely dominated by the full bargaining framework, yet it is still present if inventory is not bargained. The inventory driven by horizontal competition plays a different strategic role of signaling to the competitor to avoid an otherwise adverse quantity competition if both retailers carried high inventory. Furthermore, despite the full cooperation nature of the full bargaining framework, it is not always in the retailer’s interest to give up the decision power on inventory (partial bargaining) and include it in the negotiation process (full bargaining). Funding: Q. Tang was supported by Nanyang Technological University [Start-Up Grant 020022-00001]. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2020.0223 .","PeriodicalId":119284,"journal":{"name":"Manufacturing & Service Operations Management","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Manufacturing & Service Operations Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2020.0223","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Problem definition: Strategic inventory refers to the inventory held by firms purely out of strategic considerations other than operational reasons (e.g., economies of scale). In this paper, we investigate the roles of strategic inventory in a system with two parallel supply chains under both full bargaining and partial bargaining, which differ in whether inventory is included in the bargaining terms. Methodology/results: (i) Under full bargaining, horizontal competition can induce an asymmetric equilibrium, whereby only one of the chains carries strategic inventory and benefits from it when the holding cost is small. The whole system, however, is worse off. (ii) Under partial bargaining, regardless of whether there is horizontal competition, the retailer in a supply chain always carries inventory when his bargaining power is small and the inventory holding cost is low. Furthermore, with horizontal competition, inventory hurts (improves) the system performance when the inventory holding cost is small (above a threshold and not too big). (iii) Full bargaining can be inferior to partial bargaining when there is horizontal competition. Managerial implications: The conventional wisdom about strategic inventory should be taken with caution. Specifically, the traditional role of strategic inventory empowering the retailer in a supply chain is completely dominated by the full bargaining framework, yet it is still present if inventory is not bargained. The inventory driven by horizontal competition plays a different strategic role of signaling to the competitor to avoid an otherwise adverse quantity competition if both retailers carried high inventory. Furthermore, despite the full cooperation nature of the full bargaining framework, it is not always in the retailer’s interest to give up the decision power on inventory (partial bargaining) and include it in the negotiation process (full bargaining). Funding: Q. Tang was supported by Nanyang Technological University [Start-Up Grant 020022-00001]. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2020.0223 .
议价条件下竞争性供应链的战略库存
问题定义:战略库存是指企业纯粹出于战略考虑而不考虑经营原因(如规模经济)而持有的库存。本文研究了两个平行供应链在完全议价和部分议价条件下战略库存在系统中的作用,这两种情况下库存是否包含在议价条件中是不同的。方法/结果:(i)在充分议价条件下,横向竞争会导致不对称均衡,即只有一家连锁店拥有战略库存,并在持有成本较低时从中受益。然而,整个系统的情况却更糟了。(ii)在部分议价条件下,无论是否存在横向竞争,当供应链中的零售商的议价能力较小且库存持有成本较低时,零售商总是持有库存。此外,在横向竞争中,当库存持有成本较小(高于阈值且不太大)时,库存会损害(提高)系统性能。(三)当存在横向竞争时,充分议价可能劣于部分议价。管理启示:应该谨慎对待关于战略库存的传统智慧。具体来说,在供应链中,战略库存赋予零售商的传统角色完全由完整的讨价还价框架主导,但如果库存没有讨价还价,它仍然存在。如果两家零售商都有高库存,那么横向竞争驱动下的库存将发挥不同的战略作用,向竞争对手发出信号,以避免不利的数量竞争。此外,尽管完全议价框架具有充分合作的性质,但放弃库存决策权(部分议价)并将其纳入谈判过程(完全议价)并不总是符合零售商的利益。资助:唐强获南洋理工大学[创业基金020022-00001]资助。补充材料:在线附录可在https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2020.0223上获得。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信