The joint economic lot sizing problem: Review and extensions

Ben‐Daya, Mohamed; Darwish, Mohammed A.; Ertoğral, Kadir

doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.12.026

Cited by 198 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Secondly, the lot-for-lot assumption underlying that model precludes stock-holding at the vendor between two consecutive shipments to the purchaser -which does not necessarily represent an optimal policy (cf. Ben-Daya et al 2008). Thirdly, we assume a joint setup cost for manufacturing and remanufacturing operations within a cycle at the vendor -something that does not, however, represent a general case (cf.…”

Section: Contracting On the Deposit Amount And A Three-part Tariffmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subsequently, Banerjee (1986a, b) has put forward a more general model that assumes a finite production rate at the vendor, and coined the term joint economic lot size (JELS). This work triggered broad interest in this and related supply-chain coordination problems, e.g., work addressing integrated production and shipment policies (see Ben-Daya et al 2008 for a review), the coordination capability of various quantity discount forms (Kohli and Park 1989), product quality and setup cost reduction (Affisco et al 2002, Liu andÇetinkaya 2007), and asymmetric information (Sucky 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A vendor–purchaser economic lot size problem with remanufacturing

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we study a closed-loop supply chain in which a single purchaser orders a particular product from a single vendor and sells it on the market. A certain fraction of used items return from the market back to the purchaser, who is responsible for collecting and returning them to the vendor. In addition to manufacturing new items, the vendor is able to remanufacture the returns into as-good-as-new items which are subsequently used to serve market demand. Our framework features the conventional joint economic lot size (JELS) model extended to include the return flow of the used items. In line with the assumptions of the JELS model, we assume a deterministic constant demand for the product. The fraction of used items returning from the market is assumed to depend on the purchaser's collection effort. To stimulate the returns, the vendor may offer the purchaser a transfer payment per item returned. The questions addressed by this study pertain to the optimal centralised control of this closed-loop supply chain, to the individually optimal policies of its members, and to the coordination within this supply chain under a decentralised control. In particular, we show that the transfer payment alone cannot coordinate the supply chain under consideration and may even fail to do so when combined with a two-part tariff -which is otherwise known to coordinate the corresponding forward supply chain. Our numerical study, though, has revealed that the combined contract is capable of substantially reducing the coordination deficit. We also introduce a novel three-part tariff which is shown to enable supply chain coordination in combination with the transfer payment.

show abstract

Section: Contracting On the Deposit Amount And A Three-part Tariffmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A vendor–purchaser economic lot size problem with remanufacturing

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The review indicates that the second model class, which includes the first one, better balances differences in inventory carrying and setup/order costs at the supplier and the buyer. Ben-Daya et al (2008) and Glock (2012) described a third model class which assumes that batches can be shipped from the supplier to the buyer. As in the case of two-and multi-stage models, forwarding products to the buyer before the production process at the supplier has been finished leads to an earlier initiation of the consumption process, which reduces total system inventory.…”

Section: Integrated Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The lot sizing problem: A tertiary study

Glock

Grosse

Ries

2014

International Journal of Production Economics

181

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Abstract: This paper provides a survey of literature reviews in the area of lot sizing. Its intention is to show which streams of research emerged from Harris' seminal lot size model, and which major achievements have been accomplished in the respective areas. We first develop the methodology of this review and then descriptively analyze the sample. Subsequently, a content-related classification scheme for lot sizing models is developed, and the reviews contained in our sample are discussed in light of this classification scheme. Our analysis shows that various extensions of Harris' lot size model were developed over the years, such as lot sizing models that include multi-stage inventory systems, incentives, or productivity issues. Permanent repository linkThe aims of our tertiary study are the following: firstly, it helps primary researchers to position their own work in the literature, to reproduce the development of different types of lot sizing problems, and to find starting points if they intend to work in a new research direction. Secondly, the study identifies several topics that offer opportunities for future secondary research.

show abstract

“…They believed this approach, known as the individually responsible and rational decision (IRRD) approach allows the vendor and the purchasers to carry out their individually rational decisions. Very recently, Ben-Daya et al (2008) provided a comprehensive and up-to-date review of the JELS that also provides some extensions of this important problem. In particular, a detailed mathematical description of, and a unified framework for, the main JELP models was provided.…”

Section: Vendor-buyer Coordinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative Models for Centralised Supply Chain Coordination

Jaber¹,

Zolfaghari²

2008

Supply Chain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionA supply chain is defined as a network of facilities and distribution options that perform the functions of procurement of materials, transformation of these materials into intermediate and finished products, and the distribution of these finished products to customers. Managing such functions along the whole chain; that is, from the supplier's supplier to the customer's customer; requires a great deal of coordination among the players in the chain. The effectiveness of coordination in supply chains could be measured in two ways: reduction in total supply chain costs and enhanced coordination services provided to the end customer ⎯ and to all players in the supply chain. Inventory is the highest cost in a supply chain accounting for almost 50% of the total logistics costs. Integrating order quantities models among players in a supply chain is a method of achieving coordination. For coordination to be successful, incentive schemes must be adopted. The literature on supply chain coordination have proposed several incentive schemes for coordination; such as quantity discounts, permissible delay in payments, price discounts, volume discount, common replenishment periods. The available quantitative models in supply chain coordination consider up to four levels (i.e., tier-1 supplier, tier-2 supplier, manufacturer, and buyer), with the majority of studies investigating a two-level supply chain with varying assumptions (e.g., multiple buyers, stochastic demand, imperfect quality, etc). Coordination decisions in supply chains are either centralized or decentralized decision-making processes. A centralized decision making process assumes a unique decision-maker (a team) managing the whole supply chain with an objective to minimize (maximize) the total supply chain cost (profit), whereas a decentralized decision-making process involves multiple decision-makers who have conflicting objectives. This chapter will review the literature for quantitative models for centralised supply chain coordination that emphasize inventory management for the period from 1990 to end of 2007. In this chapter, we will classify the models on the basis of incentive schemes, supply chain levels, and assumptions. This chapter will also provide a map indicative of the limitations of the available studies and steer readers to future directions along this line of research. Centralised supply chain coordinationA typical supply chain consists of multistage business entities where raw materials and components are pushed forward from the supplier's supplier to the customer's customer. During this forward push, value is gradually added at each entity in the supply chain transforming raw materials and components to take their final form as finished products at the customer's end, the buyer. These business entities may be owned by the same organization or by several organizations. Goyal & Gupta (1989) suggested that coordination could be achieved by integrating lotsizing models. However, coordinating orders among players in a supply chain might...

show abstract

The joint economic lot sizing problem: Review and extensions

Cited by 198 publications

References 41 publications

A vendor–purchaser economic lot size problem with remanufacturing

A vendor–purchaser economic lot size problem with remanufacturing

The lot sizing problem: A tertiary study

Quantitative Models for Centralised Supply Chain Coordination

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About