The Coordination and Preference of Supply Chain Contracts Based on Time-Sensitivity Promotional Mechanism

To encourage retailers to submit orders as soon as possible, manufacturers usually launch a time-sensitivity promotional mechanism that the earlier you order, the cheaper the wholesale price will be in advance of the selling season. This paper aims to investigate if the mechanism can improve supply chain performance. A dyadic decentralized supply chain system comprising a single manufacturer and a single retailer is viewed as a research framework. Initially, a benchmark model is proposed to provide a criterion-referenced for coordinating the supply chain in a non-standard distribution environment. Second, a time-sensitive wholesale price contract is constructed to confirm that the mechanism can coordinate the supply chain. However, the retailer accepts the entire forecast risk under the contract. An improved contract called a time-sensitive revenue-sharing contract is constructed based on the notion that the manufacturer shares partial forecast risk. The results show that participants can arbitrarily divide the optimal supply chain’s expected profit between the constructed price contracts; however, two differences exist between the contracts, that is, participants have contract preferences. Finally, a numerical analysis and a few management insights are given.     

Corporate social responsibility: The implications of cost improvement and promotion effort

We investigate the interaction of these two strategic decisions when corporate social responsibility (CSR) is incorporated into supply chain partners' decisions. Our results show that, with a noncooperative CSR scenario, the upstream manufacturer is more aggressive in investing in innovation to reduce production costs, which strategically lowers the wholesale price to retailers, and the downstream retailer is also less reluctant to engage in more promotion efforts to induce demand in comparison with a cooperative CSR scenario. Furthermore, the customer's sensitivity to promotion effort may hurt the CSR level of each party.     

生产商回购合同与需求不确定

生产商回购合同已经被广泛看成一种渠道间成员共担风险的一种方式。在生产商回购合同中,生产商决定最优的批发价格ω和回购价格s。在给定ω,s的条件下,零售商决定向生产商最优的订货量Q,本文通过对生产商回购合同的分析,从而得出零售商的最优订货量以及生产商所采取的最优策略。同时给出了生产商使用回购合同的的条件以及分析了市场需求不确定对生产商和零售商的影响。     

基于零售商促销的渠道协调及数量折扣契约设计

定量研究当零售商具有促销策略时的渠道协调。在此种情形下，渠道成员独立决策时线形契约无法促成渠道协调，通过博弈模型分析，给出一种协调数量折扣价格契约，并对渠道协调后的利润分配作了初步探讨。结果表明，制造商促使该类渠道达成协调的数量折扣有无穷多个，在一定条件下渠道成员双方利润均会增加，并给出了算例分析。同时根据数量折扣形式，对传统的“入场费”问题进行了再讨论，得出了“入场费”与渠道协调之间的关系，进而揭示出“入场费”在实践中深层含义。     

Coupons and price discrimination in vertically‐correlated markets

This research analyzes the non‐cooperative and cooperative strategies with respect to manufacturer and retailer coupons. In a model with one manufacturer selling its product to one retailer, it is found that the retailer can achieve third‐degree price discrimination equilibrium in retail markets by issuing coupons to demanders with higher elasticity. Although facing only one retailer, the manufacturer can also achieve the same third‐degree price discrimination equilibrium by issuing coupons directly to demanders of higher elasticity. However, when only one firm issues the coupon, both manufacturer and retailer coupons can help alleviate the channel profit loss due to double marginalization. If the manufacturer and the retailer non‐cooperatively issue coupons, then the subgame‐perfect Nash equilibrium outcomes are equivalent to those under the successive third‐degree price discrimination. Moreover, cooperative strategies between the manufacturer and the retailer can eliminate double marginalization, achieve the vertical integration effect, and lead to higher profits, consumer surpluses, and social surpluses than non‐cooperative coupon strategies. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Two-period supply chain coordination strategies with ambidextrous sustainable innovations

This study considers a manufacturer with ambidextrous sustainable innovation capability selling products in environmentally conscious market through an independent retailer in a two-period game setting. We design a two-period game theoretic and dyadic supply chain (SC) model considering exploitative and exploratory nature of environmental innovations. We study five different contract types, namely, wholesale price contract, vertical Nash game structure, cost sharing contract, revenue sharing contract and two-part tariff contract. We demonstrate the impact of market sensitivity towards sustainable innovation and cost parameters on optimal level of decision parameters. The equilibrium results reveal that a suitably designed two-part tariff contract can be used to achieve coordination in a fragmented SC. The equilibrium results assist managers to optimise the SC based on the two-period contract model. The results obtained in this study can help the decision-makers to take decisions on investment in the ambidextrous sustainable innovation under different types of contract structures.     

基于渠道竞争的双渠道供应链低碳协调策略

针对由一个制造商和一个零售商构成的双渠道供应链,将渠道竞争和产品的低碳性能引入消费者的非线性需求中,通过构建制造商为主导者的Stackelberg博弈模型,对比分析了分散决策和集中决策下的最优定价、碳排放水平和成员利润,并采用价格折扣-成本分摊契约实现了供应链的协调。研究结果表明:在分散决策和集中决策两种情况下,渠道竞争程度的增加均会造成碳排放水平、供应链利润和消费者效用的降低;集中决策下的直销价格大于分散决策下的直销价格,集中决策下的零售价格小于分散决策下的零售价格。最后通过算例验证了以上结论和协调机制的有效性。     

不对称信息的供应链激励机制研究

研究由单个制造商和单个零售商组成二级供应链,基于市场需求是线性的,且受价格与销售努力的影响。首先,研究在对称信息下,集中模式和分散模式两种情况下的供应链,求出制造商和零售商使得利润达到最优时的最优批发价及销售价;其次,研究了在信息不对称情况下,制造商的机制设计问题,得到了制造商激励批发价的表达式以及零售商的最优零售价的公式;最后利用实例仿真对模型进行分析,结果表明该激励机制对整个供应链的收益有改善作用。     

基于信息不对称的损失厌恶供应链博弈研究

考虑制造商不知道零售商的损失厌恶信息,基于Stackelberg博弈方法,研究损失厌恶信息不对称对企业决策、企业之间的博弈关系、企业与供应链绩效的影响。算例结果表明,如果制造商高估零售商的损失厌恶程度,导致制造商的批发价格下降、零售商的订货量增加,对零售商有利,但对制造商不利;反之,如果制造商低估零售商的损失厌恶程度,导致制造商的批发价格增加、零售商的订货量下降,对制造商与零售商都不利。所以,零售商希望制造商高估零售商的损失厌恶程度,而制造商希望准确估计零售商的损失厌恶程度,该结论符合人们的直觉判断。     

Pricing policy and coordination for a two-layer supply chain of duopolistic retailers and socially responsible manufacturer

This paper explores channel coordination and profit distribution in a two-layer socially responsible supply chain that consists of a manufacturer and two competitive retailers. In manufacturer-Stackelberg game setting, the manufacturer exhibits corporate social responsibility and the retailers play Cournot and Collusion games. Besides comparing the optimal decisions of the retailers two game behaviours, the paper analyses the effects of social responsibility on the optimal decisions. It is found that two-part tariff contract resolves channel conflict and provides win–win outcome for a specific range of the franchise fee and it is always possible to find a particular profit split using Nash bargaining product. With increasing social responsibility of the manufacturer, the coordinated wholesale prices of the manufacturer may be both decreasing or ‘U’ shaped and decreasing when the market potentials of the retailers are almost the same or significantly different. Also, at least one coordinated wholesale price is less than the manufacturer's marginal cost. The proposed model is illustrated by a numerical example.     

One‐Stop Shopping as a Cause of Slotting Fees: A Rent‐Shifting Mechanism

Consumers increasingly prefer to bundle their purchases into a single shopping trip, inducing complementaries between initially independent or substitutable goods. Taking this one‐stop shopping behavior into account, we show that slotting fees may emerge as a result of a rent‐shifting mechanism in a three‐party negotiation framework, where a monopolistic retailer negotiates sequentially with two suppliers about two‐part tariff contracts. If the goods are initially independent or sufficiently differentiated, the wholesale price negotiated with the first supplier is upward distorted. This allows the retailer and the first supplier to extract rent from the second supplier. To compensate the retailer for the higher wholesale price, the first supplier pays a slotting fee as long as its bargaining power vis‐à‐vis the retailer is not too large.     

两供应商单零售商的货架展示量与定价决策模型

本文从零售商的角度,首先分析了零售商自身利润最大化的分散式决策,然后分别研究了供应链系统利润最大化、供应商和零售商联盟下的渠道利润最大化的集中式决策模型。进而提出了与展示量和零售价格相关的批发价加补贴合同,得到协调零售商的分散式决策,达到与系统利润最大化决策一致的结果。     

考虑强势零售商压价和投资行为的供应链协调

中国流通产业的零供矛盾日益凸显,针对强势零售商的压价问题构建博弈模型并分析其对供应链协调的影响。在由单制造商和单零售商构成的二级供应链中,考虑零售商在主导产品零售价格的同时,通过增加广告投入或提高服务水平等市场投资措施刺激产品需求,探讨当零售商运用其较强的议价能力对制造商提出的批发价进行强制压价时,双方如何通过合作博弈寻找最佳策略。发现在一定的条件下,强势零售商的压价行为不仅可以提升品牌商誉,更能帮助实现供应链协调。     

双渠道供应链库存协调的回购策略

在双渠道供应链中,制造商既通过传统零售渠道又通过网络直销渠道将产品销售给最终消费者。因此,制造商既是零售商的供应商同时又是其直接竞争者,为了避免“渠道冲突”他们之间需要建立协调机制。考虑由单一制造商和单一零售商组成的双渠道供应链。在两个渠道都面临随机需求的条件下,对两渠道之间的库存协调和利益分配问题展开研究。结果表明,在仅由零售商做出集中库存决策的模式下,引入回购策略能够同时解决双渠道供应链的库存协调和利益分配问题。最后,通过数值分析进一步验证结论。     

Trade spends and profitability of promotions

This paper examines the prevalent mechanism of financing advertising and temporary price reductions through trade spend budgets. A manufacturer and a retailer interact for a number of periods with a plan to hold a sale in the last period. During the nonpromotional periods, the retailer accumulates the funds in this budget in proportion to the size of its order from the manufacturer. In the sale period, the budget is used to finance the discount offered by the manufacturer and advertising. I find that the manufacturer drops its price in the sale period to increase the profitability of promotions for the retailer. To be able to sell more units during the sale period, the retailer needs to accumulate a larger trade spend. This is accomplished by setting a smaller mark-up over the manufacturer's price in the regular periods. The manufacturer takes advantage of the retailer's softer pricing by increasing its regular wholesale price. As long as such trade spends are used to finance advertising, the total profits of each firm increase. Using fixed trade spends, where the manufacturer allocates a fixed amount for the retailer, does not lead to an increase in profits.     

Upstream Pricingand Advertising Signal Downstream Demand

This paper considers price and advertising decisions by a monopolist manufacturer who is privately informed about the strength of consumer demand. Consumers respond to advertising and to the retail price chosen by an uninformed retailer on the basis of his beliefs about demand. This signaling game has a unique intuitive equilibrium outcome in which a high-demand manufacturer chooses his full-information pair of wholesale price and advertising. When demand is low, the wholesale price is distorted downward from its full information level, whereas demand-enhancing advertising may be distorted in either direction. Dissipative advertising is not distorted because it is never used.     

基于部分收益共享契约的双渠道供应链协调

构建了由一个制造商和一个零售商组成的双渠道供应链模型,其中制造商和零售商均拥有网络销售渠道,零售商为Stackelberg对策博弈的主方。分析、比较了集中式和分散式决策下双渠道供应链的最优均衡解,并从制造商与零售商合作的角度,对传统收益共享契约进行了改进,并论证了这种契约能够实现双渠道供应链的协调。最后通过算例分析,进一步验证了所改进的收益共享契约的有效性。     

存在规模效应的再制造回收渠道决策模型

在第三方回收存在规模效应的情况下,文中建立了再制造闭环供应链的回收渠道决策模型。比较了三种回收渠道中回收率、零售价、批发价以及制造商和零售商的利润关系,以及通过算例分析了规模效应对第三方回收率以及供应链上各成员利润的影响。结果表明：规模效应较大时,第三方回收渠道优于制造商和零售商回收渠道;在第三方回收模型中,回收率随着规模效应的减小而减小;规模效应较大时,第三方分得最多的再制造利润,其次是制造商,但随着规模效应的减小,利润逐渐转移到零售商那里。     

Bait and ditch: Consumer naïveté and salesforce incentives

We analyze a model of price competition between a transparent retailer and a deceptive one in a market where a fraction of consumers is naïve. The transparent retailer is an independent shop managed by its owner. The deceptive retailer belongs to a chain and is operated by a manager. The two retailers sell an identical base product, but the deceptive one also offers an add‐on. Rational consumers never consider buying the add‐on while naïve ones can be “talked” into buying it. By offering the manager a contract that pushes him to never sell the base good without the add‐on, the chain can induce an equilibrium in which both retailers obtain more‐than‐competitive profits. The equilibrium features price dispersion and market segmentation, with the deceptive retailer targeting only naïve consumers whereas the transparent retailer serves only rational ones.     

考虑产品不同残值的供应链收益共享契约协调效用研究

研究了一个制造商批发一种产品给单一零售商的供应链协调模型。研究表明,当零售商剩余产品处理残值大于或等于制造商产品处理残值时,通过收益共享契约可以有效协调供应链,实现供应链最大化利润;但当零售商剩余产品处理残值小于制造商产品处理残值时,通过收益共享契约无法实现供应链利润最大化。