Abstract

To avoid inventory risks, manufacturers often place rush orders with suppliers only after they receive firm orders from their customers (retailers). Rush orders are costly to both parties because the supplier incurs higher production costs. We consider a situation where the supplier's production cost is reduced if the manufacturer can place some of its order in advance. In addition to the rush order contract with a pre‐established price, we examine whether the supplier should offer advance‐order discounts to encourage the manufacturer to place a portion of its order in advance, even though the manufacturer incurs some inventory risk. While the advance‐order discount contract is Pareto‐improving, our analysis shows that the discount contract cannot coordinate the supply chain. However, if the supplier imposes a pre‐specified minimum order quantity requirement as a qualifier for the manufacturer to receive the advance‐order discount, then such a combined contract can coordinate the supply chain. Furthermore, the combined contract enables the supplier to attain the first‐best solution. We also explore a delegation contract that either party could propose. Under this contract, the manufacturer delegates the ordering and salvaging activities to the supplier in return for a discounted price on all units procured. We find the delegation contract coordinates the supply chain and is Pareto‐improving. We extend our analysis to a setting where the suppliers capacity is limited for advance production but unlimited for rush orders. Our structural results obtained for the one‐supplier‐one‐manufacturer case continue to hold when we have two manufacturers.

Highlights

  • Grocery retailers often sell private labels of holiday celebration products with a single selling season

  • Discount Contracts with Delegations In Proposition 3, we argued that the combined contract can enable the supplier to achieve the first-best solution by coordinating the supply chain

  • We have examined three supply chain contracts that are applicable in the context when the supplier can afford to offer advance-order discounts to its manufacturer, who places its order before the uncertain demand is realized

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Grocery retailers often sell private labels of holiday celebration products (e.g., moon cakes, pumpkin pies, etc.) with a single selling season. Based on our work with a grocery retailer in the UK, we learned that food contract manufacturers and packaging material suppliers are aware of the trade-off between the benefits of advance-order discounts and the (imputed) costs of the leftover packaging materials This trade-off motivated us to examine the following research questions for the case when the original rush order contract price is already established: 1. We consider the case wherein the manufacturer (or the supplier) proposes that the ordering decisions and the salvaging activities are delegated to the supplier in exchange for a new discounted price for all the units procured by the manufacturer.4 Such a contract is akin to the vendor managed inventory (VMI) setup in supply chains.

Literature Review
The Model
First-Best Solution
Optimal Advance Order Discount Contract
Over-Production by the Supplier in the First
Advance-Order Discount Contract with a Minimum Order Quantity
Discount Contracts with Delegations
Optimal Advance-Order Discount Contract with Two Manufacturers
Conclusions and Future Directions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call