Long-term and penalty contracts in a two-stage supply chain with stochastic demand

Recent applications of game-theoretic analysis to supply chain efficiency have focused on constructs between a buyer (the retailer or manufacturer) and a seller (the supplier) in successive stages of a supply chain. If demand for the final product is stochastic then the supplier has an incentive to...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of operational research 2008, Vol.184 (1), p.147-156
Hauptverfasser: Frascatore, Mark R., Mahmoodi, Farzad
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 156
container_issue 1
container_start_page 147
container_title European journal of operational research
container_volume 184
creator Frascatore, Mark R.
Mahmoodi, Farzad
description Recent applications of game-theoretic analysis to supply chain efficiency have focused on constructs between a buyer (the retailer or manufacturer) and a seller (the supplier) in successive stages of a supply chain. If demand for the final product is stochastic then the supplier has an incentive to keep its capacity relatively low to avoid creating unneeded capacity. The manufacturer, on the other hand, prefers the supplier’s capacity to be high to ensure that the final demand is satisfied. The manufacturer therefore constructs a contract to induce the supplier to increase its production capacity. Most research examines contracting when final demand is realized after the manufacturer places its order to the supplier. However, if final demand is realized before the manufacturer places its order to the supplier, these types of contracts can be ineffective. This paper examines two contracts under the latter timing scenario: long-term contracts in which the business relationship is repeated, and penalty contracts in which the supplier is penalized for too little capacity. Results indicate long-term contracts increase the profit potential of the supply chain. Furthermore, the penalty contracts can ensure that the supplier chooses a capacity level such that the full profit potential is achieved.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ejor.2006.10.056
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_204145147</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0377221706011428</els_id><sourcerecordid>1337106391</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c426t-9879dec08049ea39c05619a71328d6813e810aee50deea1dfb2dff2747ef61d63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UF1r3DAQFKGFXtP-gT6JvvuilW1JhryU0I-Qg0Bpn4UqrXMyd5Yr6RLu33fNlT5WsFp2d2YYhrEPILYgQN1MW5xS3kohFC22oldXbANGy0YZJV6xjWi1bqQE_Ya9LWUSQkAP_YZ936X5qamYj9zNgS84u0M9c5_mmp2vhceZO15fUlOqe0JeTstyoPve0eEl1j0vNdFUavQ84JFE3rHXozsUfP-3X7OfXz7_uPvW7B6_3t992jW-k6o2g9FDQC-M6AZ07eDJNAxOQytNUAZaNCAcYi8CooMw_pJhHKXuNI4Kgmqv2ceL7pLT7xOWaqd0yuS_WCk66HroNIHkBeRzKiXjaJccjy6fLQi7Rmcnu0Zn1-jWHbkg0sOFlHFB_4-B9AiKxT7b1oHp6D9TEdVQi-uSall7py30yu7rkdRuL2pIYTxHzLb4iLPHEDP6akOK_zPzBw_MkTQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>204145147</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Long-term and penalty contracts in a two-stage supply chain with stochastic demand</title><source>RePEc</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Frascatore, Mark R. ; Mahmoodi, Farzad</creator><creatorcontrib>Frascatore, Mark R. ; Mahmoodi, Farzad</creatorcontrib><description>Recent applications of game-theoretic analysis to supply chain efficiency have focused on constructs between a buyer (the retailer or manufacturer) and a seller (the supplier) in successive stages of a supply chain. If demand for the final product is stochastic then the supplier has an incentive to keep its capacity relatively low to avoid creating unneeded capacity. The manufacturer, on the other hand, prefers the supplier’s capacity to be high to ensure that the final demand is satisfied. The manufacturer therefore constructs a contract to induce the supplier to increase its production capacity. Most research examines contracting when final demand is realized after the manufacturer places its order to the supplier. However, if final demand is realized before the manufacturer places its order to the supplier, these types of contracts can be ineffective. This paper examines two contracts under the latter timing scenario: long-term contracts in which the business relationship is repeated, and penalty contracts in which the supplier is penalized for too little capacity. Results indicate long-term contracts increase the profit potential of the supply chain. Furthermore, the penalty contracts can ensure that the supplier chooses a capacity level such that the full profit potential is achieved.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0377-2217</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-6860</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2006.10.056</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EJORDT</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Collaborative relationships ; Contracts ; Game theory ; Manufacturers ; Optimal contracts ; Production capacity ; Stochastic models ; Studies ; Suppliers ; Supply chain management ; Supply chains ; Supply contracts</subject><ispartof>European journal of operational research, 2008, Vol.184 (1), p.147-156</ispartof><rights>2006 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Sequoia S.A. Jan 1, 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c426t-9879dec08049ea39c05619a71328d6813e810aee50deea1dfb2dff2747ef61d63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c426t-9879dec08049ea39c05619a71328d6813e810aee50deea1dfb2dff2747ef61d63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.10.056$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,3552,4010,4026,27930,27931,27932,46002</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://econpapers.repec.org/article/eeeejores/v_3a184_3ay_3a2008_3ai_3a1_3ap_3a147-156.htm$$DView record in RePEc$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Frascatore, Mark R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mahmoodi, Farzad</creatorcontrib><title>Long-term and penalty contracts in a two-stage supply chain with stochastic demand</title><title>European journal of operational research</title><description>Recent applications of game-theoretic analysis to supply chain efficiency have focused on constructs between a buyer (the retailer or manufacturer) and a seller (the supplier) in successive stages of a supply chain. If demand for the final product is stochastic then the supplier has an incentive to keep its capacity relatively low to avoid creating unneeded capacity. The manufacturer, on the other hand, prefers the supplier’s capacity to be high to ensure that the final demand is satisfied. The manufacturer therefore constructs a contract to induce the supplier to increase its production capacity. Most research examines contracting when final demand is realized after the manufacturer places its order to the supplier. However, if final demand is realized before the manufacturer places its order to the supplier, these types of contracts can be ineffective. This paper examines two contracts under the latter timing scenario: long-term contracts in which the business relationship is repeated, and penalty contracts in which the supplier is penalized for too little capacity. Results indicate long-term contracts increase the profit potential of the supply chain. Furthermore, the penalty contracts can ensure that the supplier chooses a capacity level such that the full profit potential is achieved.</description><subject>Collaborative relationships</subject><subject>Contracts</subject><subject>Game theory</subject><subject>Manufacturers</subject><subject>Optimal contracts</subject><subject>Production capacity</subject><subject>Stochastic models</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Suppliers</subject><subject>Supply chain management</subject><subject>Supply chains</subject><subject>Supply contracts</subject><issn>0377-2217</issn><issn>1872-6860</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>X2L</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UF1r3DAQFKGFXtP-gT6JvvuilW1JhryU0I-Qg0Bpn4UqrXMyd5Yr6RLu33fNlT5WsFp2d2YYhrEPILYgQN1MW5xS3kohFC22oldXbANGy0YZJV6xjWi1bqQE_Ya9LWUSQkAP_YZ936X5qamYj9zNgS84u0M9c5_mmp2vhceZO15fUlOqe0JeTstyoPve0eEl1j0vNdFUavQ84JFE3rHXozsUfP-3X7OfXz7_uPvW7B6_3t992jW-k6o2g9FDQC-M6AZ07eDJNAxOQytNUAZaNCAcYi8CooMw_pJhHKXuNI4Kgmqv2ceL7pLT7xOWaqd0yuS_WCk66HroNIHkBeRzKiXjaJccjy6fLQi7Rmcnu0Zn1-jWHbkg0sOFlHFB_4-B9AiKxT7b1oHp6D9TEdVQi-uSall7py30yu7rkdRuL2pIYTxHzLb4iLPHEDP6akOK_zPzBw_MkTQ</recordid><startdate>2008</startdate><enddate>2008</enddate><creator>Frascatore, Mark R.</creator><creator>Mahmoodi, Farzad</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Elsevier Sequoia S.A</general><scope>DKI</scope><scope>X2L</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2008</creationdate><title>Long-term and penalty contracts in a two-stage supply chain with stochastic demand</title><author>Frascatore, Mark R. ; Mahmoodi, Farzad</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c426t-9879dec08049ea39c05619a71328d6813e810aee50deea1dfb2dff2747ef61d63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Collaborative relationships</topic><topic>Contracts</topic><topic>Game theory</topic><topic>Manufacturers</topic><topic>Optimal contracts</topic><topic>Production capacity</topic><topic>Stochastic models</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Suppliers</topic><topic>Supply chain management</topic><topic>Supply chains</topic><topic>Supply contracts</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Frascatore, Mark R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mahmoodi, Farzad</creatorcontrib><collection>RePEc IDEAS</collection><collection>RePEc</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>European journal of operational research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Frascatore, Mark R.</au><au>Mahmoodi, Farzad</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Long-term and penalty contracts in a two-stage supply chain with stochastic demand</atitle><jtitle>European journal of operational research</jtitle><date>2008</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>184</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>147</spage><epage>156</epage><pages>147-156</pages><issn>0377-2217</issn><eissn>1872-6860</eissn><coden>EJORDT</coden><abstract>Recent applications of game-theoretic analysis to supply chain efficiency have focused on constructs between a buyer (the retailer or manufacturer) and a seller (the supplier) in successive stages of a supply chain. If demand for the final product is stochastic then the supplier has an incentive to keep its capacity relatively low to avoid creating unneeded capacity. The manufacturer, on the other hand, prefers the supplier’s capacity to be high to ensure that the final demand is satisfied. The manufacturer therefore constructs a contract to induce the supplier to increase its production capacity. Most research examines contracting when final demand is realized after the manufacturer places its order to the supplier. However, if final demand is realized before the manufacturer places its order to the supplier, these types of contracts can be ineffective. This paper examines two contracts under the latter timing scenario: long-term contracts in which the business relationship is repeated, and penalty contracts in which the supplier is penalized for too little capacity. Results indicate long-term contracts increase the profit potential of the supply chain. Furthermore, the penalty contracts can ensure that the supplier chooses a capacity level such that the full profit potential is achieved.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.ejor.2006.10.056</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0377-2217
ispartof European journal of operational research, 2008, Vol.184 (1), p.147-156
issn 0377-2217
1872-6860
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_204145147
source RePEc; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Collaborative relationships
Contracts
Game theory
Manufacturers
Optimal contracts
Production capacity
Stochastic models
Studies
Suppliers
Supply chain management
Supply chains
Supply contracts
title Long-term and penalty contracts in a two-stage supply chain with stochastic demand
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-04T01%3A49%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Long-term%20and%20penalty%20contracts%20in%20a%20two-stage%20supply%20chain%20with%20stochastic%20demand&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20operational%20research&rft.au=Frascatore,%20Mark%20R.&rft.date=2008&rft.volume=184&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=147&rft.epage=156&rft.pages=147-156&rft.issn=0377-2217&rft.eissn=1872-6860&rft.coden=EJORDT&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.10.056&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1337106391%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=204145147&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0377221706011428&rfr_iscdi=true