协同预测在供应链中的价值

Mumin Kurtulus, Sezer Ülkü, L. B. Toktay
{"title":"协同预测在供应链中的价值","authors":"Mumin Kurtulus, Sezer Ülkü, L. B. Toktay","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1841183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Motivated by the mixed evidence concerning the adoption level and value of collaborative forecasting (CF) implementations in retail supply chains, in this paper, we explore the conditions under which CF offers the highest potential. We consider a two-stage supply chain with a single supplier selling its product to consumers through a single retailer. We assume that both the supplier and the retailer can improve the quality of their demand forecasts by making costly forecasting investments to gather and analyze information. First, we consider a noncollaborative model where the supplier and the retailer can invest in forecasting but do not share forecast information. Next, we examine a collaborative forecasting model where the supplier and the retailer combine their information to form a single shared demand forecast. We investigate the value of CF by comparing each party's profits in these scenarios under three contractual forms that are widely used in practice (two variations of the simple wholesale price contract as well as the buyback contract). We show that for a given set of parameters, CF may be Pareto improving for none to all three of the contractual structures, and that the Pareto regions under all three contractual structures can be expressed with a unifying expression that admits an intuitive interpretation. We observe that these regions are limited and explain how they are shaped by the contractual structure, power balance, and relative forecasting capability of the parties. To determine the specific value of collaborative forecasting as a function of different factors, we carry out a numerical analysis and observe the following. First, under noncoordinating contracts, improved information as a result of CF has the added benefit of countering the adverse effects of double marginalization in addition to reducing the cost of supply--demand mismatch. Second, one may expect the value of CF to increase with bargaining power, however this does not hold in general: The value of CF for the newsvendor first increases and then decreases in his bargaining power. Finally, whereas one may expect CF to be more valuable under coordinating contracts, rather than a simple wholesale price contract that is prone to double marginalization, the magnitude of the gain from CF is in many cases higher in the absence of quantity coordination.","PeriodicalId":129698,"journal":{"name":"Supply Chain Management eJournal","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"44","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Value of Collaborative Forecasting in Supply Chains\",\"authors\":\"Mumin Kurtulus, Sezer Ülkü, L. B. Toktay\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1841183\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Motivated by the mixed evidence concerning the adoption level and value of collaborative forecasting (CF) implementations in retail supply chains, in this paper, we explore the conditions under which CF offers the highest potential. We consider a two-stage supply chain with a single supplier selling its product to consumers through a single retailer. We assume that both the supplier and the retailer can improve the quality of their demand forecasts by making costly forecasting investments to gather and analyze information. First, we consider a noncollaborative model where the supplier and the retailer can invest in forecasting but do not share forecast information. Next, we examine a collaborative forecasting model where the supplier and the retailer combine their information to form a single shared demand forecast. We investigate the value of CF by comparing each party's profits in these scenarios under three contractual forms that are widely used in practice (two variations of the simple wholesale price contract as well as the buyback contract). We show that for a given set of parameters, CF may be Pareto improving for none to all three of the contractual structures, and that the Pareto regions under all three contractual structures can be expressed with a unifying expression that admits an intuitive interpretation. We observe that these regions are limited and explain how they are shaped by the contractual structure, power balance, and relative forecasting capability of the parties. To determine the specific value of collaborative forecasting as a function of different factors, we carry out a numerical analysis and observe the following. First, under noncoordinating contracts, improved information as a result of CF has the added benefit of countering the adverse effects of double marginalization in addition to reducing the cost of supply--demand mismatch. Second, one may expect the value of CF to increase with bargaining power, however this does not hold in general: The value of CF for the newsvendor first increases and then decreases in his bargaining power. Finally, whereas one may expect CF to be more valuable under coordinating contracts, rather than a simple wholesale price contract that is prone to double marginalization, the magnitude of the gain from CF is in many cases higher in the absence of quantity coordination.\",\"PeriodicalId\":129698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Supply Chain Management eJournal\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"44\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Supply Chain Management eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1841183\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supply Chain Management eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1841183","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 44

摘要

基于关于协同预测(CF)在零售供应链中实施的采用水平和价值的混合证据,在本文中,我们探讨了CF提供最大潜力的条件。我们考虑一个两阶段的供应链,其中一个供应商通过一个零售商向消费者销售其产品。我们假设供应商和零售商都可以通过进行昂贵的预测投资来收集和分析信息,从而提高其需求预测的质量。首先,我们考虑一个非协作模型,其中供应商和零售商可以投资于预测,但不共享预测信息。接下来,我们研究了一个合作预测模型,其中供应商和零售商将他们的信息结合起来形成一个单一的共享需求预测。我们通过比较在实践中广泛使用的三种合同形式(简单批发价格合同的两种变体以及回购合同)下这些情景下各方的利润来研究CF的价值。我们证明了对于给定的一组参数,CF可能对所有三种契约结构都是帕累托改进,并且所有三种契约结构下的帕累托区域都可以用一个允许直观解释的统一表达式来表示。我们观察到这些区域是有限的,并解释了它们是如何被契约结构、权力平衡和各方的相对预测能力所塑造的。为了确定协同预测的具体值作为不同因素的函数,我们进行了数值分析,观察到以下几点:首先,在非协调契约下,CF带来的信息改善除了降低供需不匹配的成本外,还具有对抗双重边缘化不利影响的额外好处。其次,人们可能会期望CF的价值随着议价能力的增加而增加,但这通常并不成立:报贩的CF的价值在他的议价能力中先增加后减少。最后,尽管人们可能期望CF在协调合同下更有价值,而不是容易产生双重边缘化的简单批发价格合同,但在缺乏数量协调的情况下,CF的收益幅度在许多情况下更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Value of Collaborative Forecasting in Supply Chains
Motivated by the mixed evidence concerning the adoption level and value of collaborative forecasting (CF) implementations in retail supply chains, in this paper, we explore the conditions under which CF offers the highest potential. We consider a two-stage supply chain with a single supplier selling its product to consumers through a single retailer. We assume that both the supplier and the retailer can improve the quality of their demand forecasts by making costly forecasting investments to gather and analyze information. First, we consider a noncollaborative model where the supplier and the retailer can invest in forecasting but do not share forecast information. Next, we examine a collaborative forecasting model where the supplier and the retailer combine their information to form a single shared demand forecast. We investigate the value of CF by comparing each party's profits in these scenarios under three contractual forms that are widely used in practice (two variations of the simple wholesale price contract as well as the buyback contract). We show that for a given set of parameters, CF may be Pareto improving for none to all three of the contractual structures, and that the Pareto regions under all three contractual structures can be expressed with a unifying expression that admits an intuitive interpretation. We observe that these regions are limited and explain how they are shaped by the contractual structure, power balance, and relative forecasting capability of the parties. To determine the specific value of collaborative forecasting as a function of different factors, we carry out a numerical analysis and observe the following. First, under noncoordinating contracts, improved information as a result of CF has the added benefit of countering the adverse effects of double marginalization in addition to reducing the cost of supply--demand mismatch. Second, one may expect the value of CF to increase with bargaining power, however this does not hold in general: The value of CF for the newsvendor first increases and then decreases in his bargaining power. Finally, whereas one may expect CF to be more valuable under coordinating contracts, rather than a simple wholesale price contract that is prone to double marginalization, the magnitude of the gain from CF is in many cases higher in the absence of quantity coordination.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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