An Empirical Investigation of Dynamic Ordering Policies

Abstract

Adaptive base stock policy is a well-known tool for managing inventories in nonstationary demand environments. This paper presents empirical tests of this policy using aggregate, firm-level data. First, we extend a single-item adaptive base stock policy in previous literature to a multi-item case. Second, we transform the policy derived for the multi-item case to a regression model that relates firm-level inventory purchases to firm-level sales and changes in sales forecasts. We focus on two research questions: Can the adaptive base stock policy explain cross-sectional ordering behaviors under sales growth? To the extent that the adaptive base stock policy fails to explain ordering behaviors under sales growth, are there frictions that explain such a finding? Our empirical results demonstrate disparities in ordering behaviors between firms experiencing high and moderate sales growth. Contrary to theoretical prediction, this implies that inventory purchases are a function of not only current sales and changes in sales forecast but also past sales growth. As potential explanations for this departure from theoretical prediction, we show that both future demand dynamics and inventory holding risks depend on past sales growth. In addition, we find that firms' inventory holding risks may also be affected by purchasing constraints imposed by supply chain contracts. Our results provide managerial implications for practitioners and inform future theoretical research. This paper was accepted by Martin Lariviere, operations management.

Inventory agility upon demand shocks: Empirical evidence from the financial crisis

“…For the sake of simplicity, we merge the quarterly reports of every three months to periods, assuming that the few later reports have been issued simultaneously with the majority. In line with standard financial economics literature, we winsorize relative metrics at the 1% level to control for outliers and erroneous data (Gompers et al, 2005; Larson et al, 2015). The above criteria resulted in a sample of 1263 firms and a total of 30,312 firm‐quarter observations (See Table 8 in the Appendix for summary statistics by segment.…”

Optimization under Connected Uncertainty

“…Many problems require models that allow for the shape of the set to vary-for example, when the volatility in an uncertain process depends on past realizations. Such uncertainties are usually described by autoregressive conditional heteroskedastic models-for example, in asset prices (Bollerslev et al 1992) or demand and sales growth of firms (Larson et al 2015). To this end, we model the covariance Σ t of the ellipsoidal uncertainty set to depend on previous realizations, i.e., Σ t (d t−1 ), while the radius r and mean µ t are predetermined.…”

Detecting overproduction: Evidence from inventory write‐down

“…In each panel, column (1) reports the regression results as reported in the original papers (Chan et al, 2021;Cotter et al, 1998;Larson et al, 2015) for comparison purposes; column…”

“…To provide a deeper understanding of the firms that report inventory write-downs compared to those that do not, we examine multiple characteristics of the write-down firms and non-write-down firms. Table 3 reports the mean and median values of the key determinants of write-downs from prior studies (Chan et al, 2021;Cotter et al, 1998;Larson et al, 2015) separately for write-down firms and control firms. We find that write-down firms | 3363 have significantly lower inventory accruals (INVACC t ) on average (mean = 0.00 vs. 0.01; tstat = −2.55), possibly reflecting their attempts to reduce their production levels in the year of the write-down as they realise that there is obsolete inventory.…”