Assortment planning at a retailer entails both selecting the set of products to be carried and setting inventory levels for each product. We study an assortment planning model in which consumers might accept substitutes when their favorite product is unavailable. We develop an algorithmic process to help retailers compute the best assortment for each store. First, we present a procedure for estimating the parameters of substitution behavior and demand for products in each store, including the products that have not been previously carried in that store. Second, we propose an iterative optimization heuristic for solving the assortment planning problem. In a computational study, we find that its solutions, on average, are within 0.5% of the optimal solution. Third, we establish new structural properties (based on the heuristic solution) that relate the products included in the assortment and their inventory levels to product characteristics such as gross margin, case-pack sizes, and demand variability. We applied our method at Albert Heijn, a supermarket chain in The Netherlands. Comparing the recommendations of our system with the existing assortments suggests a more than 50% increase in profits.

It is common for a retailer to sell products from competing manufacturers. How then should the firms manage their contract negotiations? The supply chain coordination literature focuses either on a single manufacturer selling to a single retailer or one manufacturer selling to many (possibly competing) retailers. We find that some key conclusions from those market structures do not apply in our setting, where multiple manufacturers sell through a single retailer. We allow the manufacturers to compete for the retailer's business using one of three types of contracts: a wholesale-price contract, a quantity-discount contract, or a two-part tariff. It is well known that the latter two, more sophisticated contracts enable the manufacturer to coordinate the supply chain, thereby maximizing the profits available to the firms. More importantly, they allow the manufacturer to extract rents from the retailer, in theory allowing the manufacturer to leave the retailer with only her reservation profit. However, we show that in our market structure these two sophisticated contracts force the manufacturers to compete more aggressively relative to when they only offer wholesale-price contracts, and this may leave them worse off and the retailer substantially better off. In other words, although in a serial supply chain a retailer may have just cause to fear quantity discounts and two-part tariffs, a retailer may actually prefer those contracts when offered by competing manufacturers. We conclude that the properties a contractual form exhibits in a one-manufacturer supply chain may not carry over to the realistic setting in which multiple manufacturers must compete to sell their goods through the same retailer.

No abstract

No abstract

This paper presents a branch-and-price algorithm for the time-dependent vehicle routing problem with time windows (TDVRPTW). We capture road congestion by considering time-dependent travel times, i.e., depending on the departure time to a customer, a different travel time is incurred. We consider the variant of the TDVRPTW where the objective is to minimize total route duration and denote this variant the duration minimizing TDVRPTW (DM-TDVRPTW). Because of time dependency, vehicles' dispatch times at the depot are crucial as road congestion might be avoided. Because of its complexity, all known solution methods to the DM-TDVRPTW are based on (meta-)heuristics. The decomposition of an arc-based formulation leads to a set-partitioning problem as the master problem, and a time-dependent shortest path problem with resource constraints as the pricing problem. The master problem is solved by means of column generation, and a tailored labeling algorithm is used to solve the pricing problem. We introduce new dominance criteria that allow more label dominance. For our numerical results, we modified Solomon's data sets by adding time dependency. Our algorithm is able to solve about 63% of the instances with 25 customers, 38% of the instances with 50 customers, and 15% of the instances with 100 customers.