Bullwhip and Reverse Bullwhip Effects under the Rationing Game

Rong, Ying; Snyder, Lawrence; Shen, Zuo‐Jun Max

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1240173

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their primary purpose is to investigate Bullwhip and Reverse Bullwhip effects under this gaming structure. The work of Rong et al (2008) is similar to our study in that both papers consider a reservation payment to prevent excessive orders in a rationing game. However, it should be noted that Rong et al (2008) assume that the retailers are identical and the capacity of the supplier is insufficient to cover all retailers' demands.…”

Section: Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 63%

“…He shows that in both cases the retailers have an incentive to amplify their needs when they expect that capacity will bind. Rong et al (2008) consider a similar model under perfect (deterministic) and imperfect (stochastic) capacity information, and further assume that the capacity of the supplier is insufficient to cover all retailers' demands. They show that the resulting game does not have an equilibrium.…”

Section: Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Value of supplier’s capacity information in a two-echelon supply chain

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In traditional supply chain models it is generally assumed that full information is available to all parties involved. Although this seems reasonable, there are cases where chain members are independent agents and possess different levels of information. In this study, we analyze a two-echelon, single supplier-multiple retailers supply chain in a single-period setting where the capacity of the supplier is limited. Embedding the lack of information about the capacity of the supplier in the model, we aim to analyze the reaction of the retailers, compare it with the full-information case, and assess the value of information and the effects of information asymmetry using game theoretic analysis. In our numerical studies, we conclude that the value of information is highly dependent on the capacity conditions and estimates of the retailers, and having information is not necessarily beneficial to the retailers.

show abstract

Section: Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 63%

Section: Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Value of supplier’s capacity information in a two-echelon supply chain

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Note that another phenomenon is also studied in the literature regarding the reverse bullwhip effect. It aims to evaluate the amplification of disturbances in the prices of raw materials on the downward stages and determine its effect on the product's final cost [18].…”

Section: Model Of the Supply Chainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Changes in Quality of Deliveries on the Vulnerability of Supply Chains

Sakli

Hennet

Mercantini

2015

Risks and Resilience of Collaborative Networks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Part 10: Performance and OptimizationInternational audienceThe main objectives of the study are to present the vulnerability of the supply chain related to the change in the quality of the products supplied, and propose solutions to mitigate its disturbance. We use ARMA (Auto Regressive Moving Average) time series to model a supply chain with one supplier and one retailer. We then analyze how changes in the quality of products delivered by the supplier may affect the system variables, taking into account the system constraints and the uncertain demand from customers. A quality predictor can then be introduced in the model to improve the resilience of the chain

show abstract

“…Also, by knowing the main drivers influencing such demand variability amplification, companies may want to invest in adjusting these drivers to decrease it. The academic literature presents many contributions on the analysis of the influencing factors of the bullwhip effect (e.g., Chen et al, 2000a;Lee et al, 1997;Rong et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%