制造商创新决策下的零售商信息共享策略

本文通过构建由单个制造商和两个零售商组成的二级供应链， 研究了信息不对称条件下的零售商信息共享和制造商产品创新策略， 并分析了横向信息泄露和创新的纵向溢出效应对零售商信息共享决策的综合影响。 发现在一定条件下， 制造商进行产品创新能够激励零售商自发共享市场需求信息， 尤其当制造商的创新能力较强时， 两零售商即使在信息泄露的情况下也有动机向制造商共享市场需求信号，并实现供应链各成员期望收益的 Pareto 改进。 当零售商没有动机自发共享信息时， 制造商可以通过一定范围内的补贴进行激励， 实现双方期望收益的提升。     

考虑产品特性影响下的闭环供应链决策分析

产品特性涉及产品质保期、 品牌效应以及产品绿色性等。 本文在不同产品特征下, 考虑零售商回收、 制造商生产新产品并将回收产品进行再制造的闭环供应链, 利用 Stackelberg 博弈分析了 3 类决策模型： 模型Ⅰ中考虑产品需求受价格和产品质保期的影响; 模型Ⅱ中考虑产品需求在受价格和质保期影响的同时还受产品品牌水平的影响; 模型Ⅲ中考虑产品需求在受价格和质保期影响的同时还受产品绿色性水平的影响。 研究发现, 模型Ⅱ和模型Ⅲ中的制造商、 零售商以及CLSC 利润均优于模型Ⅰ。 同时, 通过灵敏度分析发现, 相比质保期, 市场上品牌水平或绿色性水平对需求的影响会对定价决策产生更显著正向影响。 最后, 研究为制造商努力方式的选择提供了参考依据。     

零售商公平偏好下两周期供应链的信息分享策略研究

本文通过建立具有公平偏好行为的零售商和公平中性的制造商组成的两周期供应链动态博弈模型, 旨在探讨两周期供应链中具有公平偏好行为的零售商的信息分享策略对制造商和零售商决策的影响。 研究表明： （1） 零售商的最优策略是两周期均不向制造商分享信息; 而对制造商来讲, 零售商选择两周期均分享信息策略, 制造商可以获得最高的效用; （2） 零售商的公平偏好行为对自身有利, 单位公平偏好系数对零售商效用的影响大于信息精确度对零售商效用的影响; （3） 若零售商向制造商分享信息, 则增加信息精确度可以弥补零售商公平偏好行为对制造商带来的损失。     

基于消费者环保意识的绿色供应链策略研究

本文以1 个制造商和1个零售商组成的供应链为研究对象， 分别针对制造商和零售商在集中控制下的决策模型和以制造商为主导的Stackelberg模型， 比较分析了产品绿色度、制造商批发价格和零售商零售价格对这两种博弈模型产生的影响， 并在此基础上进一步建立了零售商制造商研发成本费用的博弈模型， 最后通过数值仿真分析求出了零售商研发费用分摊比例的最佳取值范围。     

中国品牌在海外能成功吗

凭借低成本的劳动力资源,中国在世界 制造业中处于主导地位。然而迄今为止,大多数中国企业一直满足于充当原始设备制造商(OEM),为世界最大的品牌企业和零售商的自有品牌供应从玩具到电视的众多产品。但是,中国政府如今正力促大型企业向海外销售品牌产品——许多企业本身也确有理由要在发达国家树立自己的品牌。国内市场竞争异常激烈,对价格产生了挥之不去的压力,而品牌产品则可以比OEM产品更为有利可图,同时参与海外市场竞争会迫使企业进行创新和改进,从而帮助它们摆     

合约包装现状

在制造商不断寻找缩短市场反馈时间方法的过程中,包装采购成为一项重要的生产战略。终端用户可以在测试新型包装产品的同时无须冒险在设备和劳动力上投入太多。随着包装制造商面对的市场分支越来越多,满足这一需求而且增长最快的一个领域就是与合作包装公司签约。当零售商将“应对市场速度看作是最高优先权的时候,制造商发现包装的外部采购是完成业务的最快方式。当然它的成本也较高,但这部分成本可以在增值销售过程中赚回来。美国包装世界(PackagingWorld)杂志在去年秋天对合约包装进行了一次深入的调查研究,这些只是从这次调研中得出来的…     

海外经验：日本的玩具销售渠道建设案例

日本的婴幼儿商品的分销系统是多层次分销系统,包括制造商、批发商、贸易公司、代理公司和零售商。婴幼儿产品的出口程序也是这样的,外贸产品供应商把产品卖给外贸商,外贸商把产品交给批发商,批发商最后把产品卖给零售商。对于海外供应商,批发商作为中间商提供合适而及时的信息的作用。批发商要为零售商提供各种数量少而下单频繁的商品,因为零售商往往由于空间太小和费用太高而没有太多的库存。由于日本产品责任法要求出口商要对出口商品出现的问题负责,所以许多零售商选择从出口商或者在出问题时能采取适当行动的批发商那里进口商品。     

OnSpeX在上海设立亚洲评估中心

为零售商和制造商提供消费类产品及包装评估和咨询的国际型供应商OnSpeX日前在上海宣布其在中国成立首个亚洲的咨询中心。     

考虑政府补贴下具有公平偏好的绿色供应链博弈模型及契约协调研究

以一个制造商、一个零售商和政府组成三级绿色供应链为背景, 本文建立了考虑供应链参与者具有公平偏好、 产品绿色度和政府补贴的4 种绿色供应链博弈模型： 制造商具有公平偏好的 Stackelberg 博弈模型、 零售商具有公平偏好的Stackelberg 博弈模型、 制造商与零售商均为公平中性的Stackelberg 博弈模型和集中决策模型, 并对4 种博弈模型中各个参数进行比较。 研究表明： 在只有零售商具有公平偏好的情形中, 政府补贴能减弱零售商公平偏好特性对供应链的消极作用, 使产品绿色度和社会福利提高到与制造商和零售商均为公平中性的情形相等; 而在只有制造商具有公平偏好的情形中, 产品绿色度、社会福利等参数仍受公平偏好特性影响。 最后, 在只有制造商具有公平偏好的Stackelberg 博弈模型基础上进一步建立了成本共担的收益共享契约下的博弈模型并进行数值仿真。     

考虑渠道权力结构和风险规避的闭环供应链差异定价机制研究

本文研究了渠道权力结构和参与者的风险规避态度对闭环供应链差异定价机制的影响.假设制造商为风险中性者而零售商是风险规避者,利用均值——方差理论得到了制造商的期望利润函数和零售商的期望效用函数,在此基础上探讨制造商主导、零售商主导和垂直纳什均衡3种渠道权力结构下的闭环供应链差异定价策略与利润分配问题.本文还分别比较了不同权力结构下新制造产品和再制造产品的最优批发价格、最优零售价格、制造商的最优期望利润以及零售商的最优期望效用,推导了零售商的风险规避系数对最优价格和最优产量的影响,最后结合算例仿真了渠道成员利润(效用)随风险规避系数和消费者偏好系数等参数的变化规律,结果表明:制造商和零售商形成垂直纳什均衡时的闭环供应链绩效最优,其次是制造商主导的闭环供应链,最差的是零售商主导的闭环供应链.     

Investigating the Cross-Category Effects of Store Brands

Our study examines the cross-category effects of store brand productsin other categories on the products in a target category. Using scannerdata for 13 product categories, we find that higher number of storebrands in other categories increases the store brand share in the targetcategory. In addition, share of the leading national brand in the targetcategory is negatively affected by the number of store brands in othercategories. Our results do not offer evidence for the effects of storebrand promotions in other categories on both the store brand and thenational brands in the target category.     

Help or Hindrance? Causal Ambiguity and Supplier Involvement in New Product Development Teams

Suppliers are increasingly being involved in interorganizational new product development (NPD) teams. Successful management of this involvement is critical both to the performance of the new product and to meeting the project's goals. Yet the transfer of knowledge between buyer and supplier may be subject to varying degrees of causal ambiguity, potentially limiting the effect of supplier involvement on performance. Understanding the dynamics of causal ambiguity within interorganizational product development is thus an important unanswered empirical question. A theoretical model is developed exploring the effect of supplier involvement practices (supplier involvement orientation, relationship commitment, and involvement depth) on the level of causal ambiguity experienced within interorganizational NPD teams, and the subsequent impact on time to competitor imitation, new product advantage, and project performance. The model also serves as a test of the paradox that causal ambiguity both inhibits imitation by competitors, but adversely affects organizational outcomes. Survey data collected from 119 research and development‐intensive manufacturing firms in the United Kingdom largely support these hypotheses. Results from structural equation modeling show that supplier involvement orientation and long‐term relationship commitment lower causal ambiguity within interorganizational NPD teams. The results also shed light on the causal ambiguity paradox showing that causal ambiguity during interorganizational NPD decreases both product and project performance, but has no significant effect on time to competitor imitation. Instead, competitor imitation is delayed by the extent to which the firm develops a new product advantage within the market. A product development strategy based upon maintaining interfirm causal ambiguity to delay competitor imitation is thus unlikely to result in a sustainable competitive advantage. Instead, managers are encouraged to undertake supplier involvement practices aimed at minimizing the level of knowledge ambiguity in the NPD project, and in doing so, improve product and project‐related performance.     

Product Hierarchy and Brand Strategy Influences on the Order of Entry Effect for Consumer Packaged Goods

Manufacturers focus on becoming more agile, software firms deploy rapid application development tools—everyone is in a hurry. Although we all understand the benefits of being first to market, we understand just as clearly that not all first-to-market products enjoy the same, sustainable benefits from being market pioneers. Why do some pioneering products experience a more significant order-of-entry effect than others? Roger A. Kerin, Gurumurthy Kalyanaram, and Daniel J. Howard examine two factors–product hierarchy and brand strategy—which may influence the magnitude of this effect for new consumer packaged goods. First, they hypothesize that pioneering a new product class offers a greater advantage than introducing a new form to an existing product class. Second, they predict that the order-of-entry effect will be greater for brand extensions than for entirely new brands. Finally, considering both product hierarchy and brand strategy, they expect that the order-of-entry advantage for brand extensions over new brands will be significantly greater within new product classes than for new forms of existing products. These hypotheses are tested using data from the Information Resources, Inc. Behaviorscan° data set. Collected from 2,500 household panel members, 75 supermarkets, and 25 drugstores, this database contains weekly measures of brand trial penetration as well as brand distribution, price, and promotion information in eight geographic markets from the period 1983–1988. The models developed in this study explore the relationships among brand trial penetration, product hierarchy, brand strategy, order of entry, lag time between successive brand entrants, and marketing mix variables (i.e., price, promotion, distribution, and advertising). The study strongly supports all three hypotheses. In particular, the analysis clearly demonstrates that the order-of-entry effect is greatest for a new product class pioneered by a brand extension. Order of entry has the least effect on a new product form pioneered by an entirely new brand. For a company seeking a competitive advantage from being first to market, innovation in product function offers greater potential benefit than innovation in product form. Such a company can also benefit from building on the name and reputation of its established brands. Although the study finds these order-of-entry effects significant, the effects of marketing mix variables such as product price and promotion are consistently stronger.     

Consumer Innovativeness and the Use of New versus Extended Brand Names for New Products*

Despite the importance of branding to new product success, little research has been conducted on how individual adoption orientation might affect brand name preferences. This paper draws on the diffusion literature to investigate how consumer innovativeness affects consumer response to alternative branding strategies (i.e., new vs. extended brands, for new products). The results of an empirical study found that consumer innovativeness has a greater effect on new product evaluations for new brand names relative to extended brand names. Also, results indicate that highly innovative consumers evaluate new products with new brand names more favorably than brand extensions. Furthermore, consumer confidence in the new product was found to mediate the effects of consumer innovativeness and its interaction with brand name type on new product evaluation. Implications include not only giving greater managerial consideration to using new brands but also supporting the chosen branding strategy with appropriate promotional efforts for respective adopter groups.     

Creating Brand Names That Work

When it comes to brands, what's in a name is everything—a product is not a brand until you name it. What you call your product makes a difference. In addition to making the product yours and no one else's, a good brand name can create a competitive edge by being memorable, by communicating the special qualities of the product, and by setting the stage for a line of future products. Lorna Opatow brings practical experience to this article in which she identifies the problems and the promises in choosing brand names, and then provides guidelines for creating, developing, and evaluating them prior to testing for market acceptance.     

Supplier integration in new product development: Computer mediated communication,knowledge exchange and buyer performance

In new product development (NPD), the buyer–supplier relationship is changing. Suppliers are becoming an integral part of the design team. This study investigates the effectiveness of computer-mediated and face-to-face communication channels on knowledge exchange between buyer and supplier firms, and ultimately buyer NPD and market performance. Open innovation literature and media richness theory are used to develop hypotheses which are then empirically tested using data collected from 157 R&D project managers from U.S. manufacturing firms. To date, empirical studies on the link between supplier integration and buyer performance show conflicting results. Structural equation modeling found a significant positive link between knowledge exchange and NPD performance, measured both in terms of effectiveness and efficiency, and a significant positive link between effective and efficient NPD and market performance. A surprising finding is that contrary to media richness theory, email can perform like face-to-face communication transmitting rich information and having a positive relationship to knowledge exchange between buyer and supplier. It was also found that with face-to-face communication, knowledge exchange fully mediates the relationship with effective NPD while with email communication knowledge exchange fully mediates the relationship with efficient NPD. Video conferencing was found to have no significant effect on knowledge exchange and the effect of web-based tools was significant and negative. The implications of these findings in theory and practice are discussed.     

The Strategic Positioning of Store Brands in Retailer–Manufacturer Negotiations

Store brands are the only brands for which the retailer is responsible not onlyfor promotion, shelf placement, and pricing, but also for positioning the brandin product space. We argue that retailers strongly value control over store brandpositioning because they will be unable to source a national brand with theirdesired product positioning. This is because retailers have an incentive to positionstore brands as close substitutes to leading national brands – a location in productspace which other national brand manufacturers would not find profitable. We presentempirical evidence that is consistent with the results of our model.     

Key supplier relationships and product introduction success: The moderating roles of self-enforcement and interdependence between buyer and supplier

This study investigates the extent to which strong relationships between a firm and its key suppliers promote effective new product introduction. Building on the relationship marketing literature, we identify self-enforcement and interdependence as two contingent relational variables that influence the strength of the buyer–supplier relationship. We use data from a survey of 2331 manufacturing firms in China to test the hypotheses. The results show that strong relationships with key suppliers correlate with product introduction success and that this positive effect is contingent on the two relational variables identified. Self-enforcement strengthens the utility of strong supplier relationships for these Chinese manufacturers, and buyer–supplier interdependence enhances this relationship.     

Do technology and manufacturing strategy links enhance operational performance? Empirical research in the auto supplier sector

Although much of the literature on manufacturing strategy (MS) and technology studies the implementation and impact of these manufacturing programs in isolation, this paper goes further by assessing the joint implementation and effect of these two manufacturing programs on performance, even when some contextual factors are present. Thus, this paper investigates how plants from the auto supplier sector make use of some operations practices from manufacturing strategy (MS) and from both product and process technology, by testing the effectiveness of both sets of practices, with the ultimate goal of enhancing operational performance. The results suggest that there are only very minor differences between high and standard performers on the aggregated level for technology practices, which may be the reason why technology does not result in significant performance differences between the two plant types. On the other hand, on the aggregated levels, there are somewhat greater differences for MS practices than for technology in both plant types, leading to larger differences in performance. While this study provides a foundation for examining MS, technology and context within a single framework, it is only through further research that a full understanding of the relationship between them will be obtained.     

Strategic Suppliers' Technical Contributions to New Product Advantage: Substitution and Configuration Options

Current theory lacks clarity on how different kinds of resources contribute to new product advantage, or how firms can combine different resources to achieve a new product advantage. While several studies have identified different firm‐specific resources that influence new product advantage, comparatively little research has explored the contribution of strategic supplier resources. Combining resource‐based and relational perspectives, this study develops a theoretical model investigating how a strategic supplier's technical capabilities impact focal firm new product advantage and how firms combine different resources to gain this advantage. The model is tested using detailed survey data collected from 153 interorganizational new product development projects in the United Kingdom within which a strategic supplier had been extensively involved. Empirical results support our research hypotheses. First, supplier technical performance is shown to have a significant positive impact on new product advantage. Next, we show that while supplier technical capabilities have a positive influence on supplier technical performance, the a priori nature of the supplier's task moderates the relationship. Finally, our data support our hypotheses related to the positive relationship between relationship‐specific absorptive capacity and new product advantage, and the proposed negative moderation of supplier technical capabilities on this relationship. Based upon these findings, we encourage managers to recognize that strategic suppliers' with greater technical capabilities perform better regardless of the degree of creativity required by their task; but that strategic suppliers with lower technical capabilities may partially compensate (substitute) for their lack of technical capabilities, if they are able to respond to high problem‐solving task requirements. Furthermore, we suggest that the firm's development of relationship‐specific absorptive capacity is much more important when a strategic supplier is less technically capable. A buying firm's relationship‐specific absorptive capacity can, according to our data, substitute for low supplier technical capabilities. On the other hand, where the supplier has strong technical capabilities, investments in relationship‐specific absorptive capacity have no effect on new product advantage. Our findings reinforce recent calls for research on how firms can combine different resources and capabilities to achieve superior performance.