Implications for the Role of Retailers in Quality Assurance

We investigate a manufacturer–retailer channel to explore the role of a retailer in assuring the quality of a manufacturer's product as a quality gatekeeper. Such a gatekeeping activity can entail a reduction in the defective rate for consumers, if the retailer charges the manufacturer a penalty for each identified defect that is no smaller than the market penalty for an unidentified defect. As a result of the retailer's gatekeeping, the change in the negotiated wholesale price only depends on the manufacturer's individual benefit, whereas the change in the retailer's optimal retail price is associated with the channel‐wide benefit. When the impact of quality relative to retail price on demand is higher, the retailer benefits more from her gatekeeping activity, thus having a greater incentive to take on the quality gatekeeping responsibility. Moreover, the retailer's gatekeeping generates a larger increase in the demand as well as each firm's profit, when the retailer has a stronger relative bargaining power.     

Impacts of demand uncertainty on retailer's dominance and manufacturer-retailer supply chain cooperation

Recent studies in marketing and distribution channels have shown that the balance of power between manufacturers and retailers is shifting. Based on this observation, we investigate a two-echelon supply chain with a manufacturer and a retailer in this paper. We first develop retailer-dominant non-cooperative game models by introducing a sensitivity of retailer's order quantity to manufacturer's wholesale price; then we analyze two cooperative scenarios, in which the Nash bargaining model is utilized to implement profit sharing between the manufacturer and the retailer. Under the assumption that the manufacturer and the retailer are risk-neutral, we find that the manufacturer and the retailer can bargain to cooperate at any level of retail-market demand uncertainty with exogenous retail price. However, the cooperation is conditional on retail-market demand uncertainty with endogenous retail price: it can be implemented if the fluctuation of retail-market demand is relatively small, and the measure of retail-market demand uncertainty does not exceed an upper bound. Theoretical and numerical analyses show that the retailer's dominance over the manufacturer increases with the increase in the sensitivity of retailer's order quantity to manufacturer's wholesale price under a limitation of retail-market demand uncertainty. Numerical analyses also show that the retailer's dominance decreases with the increase in retail-market demand uncertainty.     

Technical Note—Demand Uncertainty Reduction in Decentralized Supply Chains

This note analyzes the effects associated with reducing demand uncertainty in a decentralized supply chain comprising one manufacturer, one retailer, and a wholesale price contract that governs the transactions between them. The demand uncertainty level is parameterized through a mean‐preserving spread, and the manufacturer's and the retailer's equilibrium decisions are solved accordingly. We consider the case of an exogenous retail price as well as the case of an endogenous retail price, and we find in both cases that the manufacturer's and the retailer's expected profits in equilibrium are not necessarily monotone decreasing in the uncertainty level. Thus, we find that, even if the cost of reducing demand uncertainty is zero, uncertainty reduction can hurt rather than benefit either or both members of the supply chain.     

The Effect of Delayed Incentives on Supply Chain Profits and Consumer Surplus

We examine the use of consumer cash mail‐in rebates offered by a manufacturer in a Stackelberg game where the manufacturer is the leader and the retailer is the follower. Our analysis indicates that rebates are profitable for manufacturers if consumers are inconsistent in the sense that their rebate valuation when they make purchase decisions is independent of their redemption probabilities when they make redemption decisions. If the manufacturer keeps the wholesale price unchanged, then the rebate increases the retailer's profit by a larger amount than the increase in the manufacturer's profit. If the manufacturer jointly optimizes the wholesale price and rebate, then the increase in the manufacturer's profit is twice the increase in the retailer's profit. The retailer responds to rebates by increasing the retail price, which increases the margin paid by consumers who do not redeem the rebate. On average, consumer surplus decreases when it is optimal for manufacturers to offer rebates. We suggest incentive schemes that make it worthwhile for retailers to limit the price increase. In these incentive schemes, the manufacturer imposes a negative relationship between the rebate value and the retail price. We show that such incentives increase supply chain profits.     

信息共享下库存量牛鞭效应的影响因素研究

目前的研究多从供应链上游角度出发考虑传统牛鞭效应,而本文从供应链下游的角度研究库存量牛鞭效应得到了不一样的管理学启示.在需求函数方面,建立的需求模型包括市场规模、价格敏感性系数等更有现实意义的要素.在此,本文建立了包括一个零售商和一个制造商的简单两级供应链,得出了制造商在采用补充至订货点策略和最小均方差预测技术,在两种不同的信息共享模式下的库存量牛鞭效应表达式,并对他们的影响因素进行了分析.而且通过数值分析对模型进行了验证并得到新的结果.通过研究发现,信息共享能够显著降低制造商的库存量牛鞭效应;零售商和制造商的库存量牛鞭效应都不受市场规模的影响;零售商的库存量牛鞭效应在一定条件下不存在;相比于零售商提前期,制造商提前期对制造商的库存量牛鞭效应影响更大.同时,价格敏感性系数、价格自相关系数等因素对制造商库存量牛鞭效应也有不同程度的影响.     

When Does a Retailer's Advance Selling Capability Benefit Manufacturer,Retailer, or Both?

Advance selling (AS) from a retailer to consumers is commonly observed in practice. With an AS capability, a retailer has the option to sell in advance or not. Having the AS option seems to increase flexibility and thus profit for a retailer. However, we show that the AS option can hurt the retailer's profit as well as supply chain performance. We identify two thresholds for a product's marginal production cost. A retailer's AS option benefits both the manufacturer and retailer when the marginal production cost is high, that is, above both thresholds. It benefits the manufacturer but hurts the retailer when the marginal production cost is moderate, that is, between the two thresholds. The result is ambiguous when the marginal production cost is low, that is, below both thresholds. We find that consumer valuation uncertainty under AS is the key driving force for the surprising result that having the retailer's AS option can hurt the retailer. When compared to the scenario where the retailer does not have the AS option, we find that the manufacturer's optimal wholesale price weakly decreases under the retailer's AS option if the marginal production cost is high. The statement is reversed if the marginal production cost is moderate or low.     

Supply Chain Conflict Due to Store Brands: The Value of Wholesale Price Commitment in a Retail Supply Chain*

Store brands are of increasing importance in retail supply chains, often causing channel conflict, as the retailer's product directly competes with the manufacturer's national brand. Extant research on the resulting channel interactions either assumes the national brand manufacturer can credibly commit to maintaining a wholesale price or that he lacks such ability. However, these two scenarios imply very different supply chain interactions, as only a national brand manufacturer with commitment ability can strategically adjust a national brand wholesale price to prevent a store brand introduction by the retailer. We specifically analyze the impact of this assumption on the manufacturer, the retailer, and the customers. We determine when long‐term contracts that provide the manufacturer with such commitment ability can improve supply chain profitability.     

Gray Markets and Supply Chain Incentives

“Gray markets” are unauthorized channels that distribute a branded product without the manufacturer's permission. Since gray markets are not officially sanctioned by the manufacturer, their existence is assumed to hurt the manufacturer. Yet manufacturers sometimes tolerate or even encourage gray market activities. We investigate the incentives of a manufacturer and its authorized retailer to engage in (or tolerate) gray markets. The firms need to consider the trade‐off between the positive effects of a gray market (price discrimination and cost savings) and the negative effects (cannibalization of sales and a loss in consumer valuation). Generally, gray markets can be categorized into two types: (i) a “local gray market,” where a retailer diverts products to unauthorized sellers operating in the same region as the retailer; and, (ii) “bootlegging,” where the retailer diverts products to unauthorized sellers in another market where the manufacturer sells through a direct channel. We characterize the equilibrium in each type of gray market and identify conditions under which the retailer will divert products to the gray market. Incentive problems are more complicated when the retailer bootlegs and, in this case, we show that conflicting incentives may lead to the emergence of a gray market where both the manufacturer's and retailer's profits decrease.     

The Impact of Product Returns and Retailer's Service Investment on Manufacturer's Channel Strategies*

We study the distribution channel decision of a manufacturer who considers whether to add an online channel (direct channel) to its brick‐and‐mortar retailer (indirect channel). The retailer faces the opportunity to invest in store assistance to help consumers choose products and thus reduce product returns. Special attention is given to the impact of product returns and retailer's store assistance investment on manufacturer's dual channel decision. We examine conditions under which the manufacturer uses dual channels and how various relevant factors affect its channel decision under two settings, depending on whether the retailer has its own online store or not. When the retailer does not have its online store, we find that (i) the addition of the direct channel raises the wholesale price; (ii) the direct channel addition hurts the retailer if the nonreplacement rate is low; (iii) the manufacturer has a lower incentive to add the direct channel when the retailer's service cost is lower or its returns reduction rate from service investment is higher; and (iv) the manufacturer should treat its own returns handling cost as a key factor in its channel structure decision. In addition, when the retailer operates an online store, we find that the manufacturer may have an incentive to add a direct channel such that both firms own direct channels.     

The Interplay between Information Acquisition and Quality Disclosure

This study investigates the interactions between a manufacturer's information acquisition and quality disclosure strategies in a supply chain setting in which the manufacturer privately knows his product quality but is uncertain about consumer preferences. We argue that the manufacturer should treat his information acquisition and quality disclosure decisions as an integrated process because these decisions can significantly influence a retailer's rational inferences about product quality and can have conflicting effects on his own profitability. Although information acquisition helps a manufacturer subsequently craft better pricing and quality disclosure strategies, it also leaks certain product information to the retailer, thus helping the retailer better estimate product quality. Therefore, in equilibrium, a manufacturer may choose not to acquire any consumer information, even when such acquisition is costless. Moreover, we find that this adverse effect of acquisition is highly dependent on the cost of disclosure and consumers’ preference differentiation. Increased consumer preference differentiation may have a non‐monotonic relationship with the manufacturer's profit, and information acquisition can become detrimental to the manufacturer once the disclosure cost is sufficiently high.     

Pricing Policy in a Supply Chain: Negotiation or Posted Pricing

This article examines the choice of pricing policy (posted pricing or negotiation) toward end customers in a supply chain. Many retailers actively decide whether or not to encourage negotiation on the shop floor. Of course, the retailer's pricing policy influences not only the retailer's profit, but also the profits of the manufacturers who sell through the retailer. However, little is known about the forces that shape the pricing policy when two self‐interested parties interact in a supply chain. We consider two alternative models depending on who has the power to decide the pricing policy: the manufacturer or the retailer. We find that an increase in the wholesale price weakens the retailer's ability to price discriminate through negotiation. Therefore, the retailer prefers negotiation at lower wholesale prices and posted pricing at higher wholesale prices. We also find that whenever the retailer prefers negotiation, the manufacturer does too. Therefore, the retailer's discretion over the pricing policy causes friction only when the retailer wants to use posted pricing, while the manufacturer wishes the retailer to use negotiation. We show that such friction arises only when product availability or the cost of negotiation is moderate. In this case, we show that the manufacturer may offer a substantial discount to persuade the retailer to negotiate. Surprisingly, in this region of friction, a decrease in the supply chain's capacity or an increase in negotiation costs (both of which are typically considered as worsening the retailer's business environment) translates into higher profit for the retailer.     

Dynamic Pricing,Production, and Channel Coordination with Stochastic Learning

We consider a decentralized two‐period supply chain in which a manufacturer produces a product with benefits of cost learning, and sells it through a retailer facing a price‐dependent demand. The manufacturer's second‐period production cost declines linearly in the first‐period production, but with a random learning rate. The manufacturer may or may not have the inventory carryover option. We formulate the resulting problems as two‐period Stackelberg games and obtain their feedback equilibrium solutions explicitly. We then examine the impact of mean learning rate and learning rate variability on the pricing strategies of the channel members, on the manufacturer's production decisions, and on the retailer's procurement decisions. We show that as the mean learning rate or the learning rate variability increases, the traditional double marginalization problem becomes more severe, leading to greater efficiency loss in the channel. We obtain revenue sharing contracts that can coordinate the dynamic supply chain. In particular, when the manufacturer may hold inventory, we identify two major drivers for inventory carryover: market growth and learning rate variability. Finally, we demonstrate the robustness of our results by examining a model in which cost learning takes place continuously.     

Optimal Contract Design for Mixed Channels Under Information Asymmetry

The mixed‐channel model is becoming increasingly popular in the marketplace. In this model, a firm selling through the traditional supply chain of wholesaler and retailer opens a direct channel to the customer through Internet sales. Because both channels have their respective advantages, the manufacturer is attracted to this business model. However, it also leads to channel conflict, with the retailer feeling threatened by direct competition. One way of eliminating the possibility of this channel conflict, where the retailer is allowed to add value to the product to differentiate its offering to the customers, is proposed in this paper. The retailer is also given full authority to make pricing decisions. This paper presents a model, under this scenario, of obtaining optimum pricing decisions by both parties, the amount of value added by the retailer, and the manufacturer's wholesale price to the retailer. Our model incorporates information asymmetry, where the manufacturer has incomplete information about the retailer's cost of adding value. We obtain closed‐form contracts with incomplete information and compare them with those with complete channel coordination. We also develop a number of managerial guidelines and identify future research topics.     

How Collection Cost Structure Drives a Manufacturer's Reverse Channel Choice

This note discusses the impact of collection cost structure on the optimal reverse channel choice of manufacturers who remanufacture their own products. Using collection cost functions that capture collection rate and collection volume dependency, we show that the optimal reverse channel choice (retailer‐ vs. manufacturer‐managed collection) is driven by how the cost structure moderates the manufacturer's ability to shape the retailer's sales and collection quantity decisions.     

Manufacturer Rebate Competition in a Supply Chain with a Common Retailer

We consider manufacturer rebate competition in a supply chain with two competing manufacturers selling to a common retailer. We fully characterize the manufacturers’ equilibrium rebate decisions and show how they depend on parameters such as the fixed cost of a rebate program, market size, the redemption rate of rebate, the proportion of rebate‐sensitive consumers in the market and competition intensity. Interestingly, more intense competition induces a manufacturer to lower rebate value or stop offering rebate entirely. Without rebate, it is known that more intense competition hurts the manufacturers and benefits the retailer. With rebate, however, more intense competition could benefit the manufacturers and hurt the retailer. We find similar counterintuitive results when there is a change in some other parameters. We also consider the case when the retailer subsidizes the manufacturers sequentially to offer rebate programs. We fully characterize the retailer's optimal subsidy strategy, and show that subsidy always benefits the retailer but may benefit or hurt the manufacturers. When the retailer wants to induce both manufacturers to offer rebate, he always prefers to subsidize the manufacturer with a higher fixed cost first. Sometimes the other manufacturer will then voluntarily offer rebate even without subsidy.     

Manufacturer encroachment with advertising

This paper studies manufacturer encroachment in a supply chain wherein the manufacturer and/or the retailer should invest in informative advertising. Using a game-theoretic framework, we explore three schemes of advertising and their influences on manufacturer encroachment. First, if the manufacturer controls advertising, encroachment will result in higher advertising intensity relative to the non-encroachment case, sometimes leading to a win-win situation for both the manufacturer and the retailer as the boosted demand flows into the wholesale market under encroachment. Second, if the retailer controls advertising, an encroaching manufacturer should further reduce the wholesale price as compared to the counterpart with no advertising. This downward pressure on wholesale price can benefit the retailer, but might hurt the encroaching manufacturer. Third, we incorporate manufacturer advertising and retailer advertising into a cooperative advertising scheme, where the manufacturer can set a participation rate to adjust the advertising cost for the retailer. Interestingly, an encroaching manufacturer will pay the retailer more to subsidize his advertising cost. Under this scheme, the manufacturer is always better off under encroachment, and the retailer can also gain as a result of advertising cost-sharing from the manufacturer. Our results also apply to the case of persuasive advertising. Although persuasive advertising leads to different prices or advertising decisions, there are always chances for the retailer to benefit from manufacturer encroachment.     

Manufacturer–Retailer Negotiations in the Presence of an Oligopolistic Input Market

When a manufacturer relies solely on its own inputs in making products, the focus of negotiations between the manufacturer and retailer is exclusively on profits in the output (retail) market. In such cases, absent retail competition concerns, standard two‐part tariff negotiations set the per‐unit wholesale price equal to marginal cost, and require fixed transfers from the retailer to the manufacturer. In this article, we recognize that manufacturers often rely on imperfectly competitive markets for at least some inputs. Incorporating this seemingly natural feature has profound implications for manufacturer–retailer negotiations since it shifts their focus from being exclusively on output markets to one that balances strategic concerns in both input and output realms. The article's main result is that the added need to discipline input prices can lead the manufacturer and retailer to write contingent contracts that are cost‐plus and prescribe lump‐sum slotting allowances (i.e., fixed transfer from the manufacturer to the retailer).     

A Note on Optimal Selling to Asymmetric Retailers

I consider a channel with one manufacturer selling the same product to two retailers engaged in imperfect competition. The retailers are asymmetric because one has a lower marginal selling cost (or a higher demand potential) than the other. I design the manufacturer's optimal selling mechanism, whereby the manufacturer must offer the same contract options to both retailers. I fully characterize the manufacturer's optimal selling mechanism for varying degrees of retailer asymmetry and competition intensity. I find that under certain conditions, the manufacturer is better off selling a larger quantity through the high‐cost (or low‐demand potential) retailer. I also show how the optimal mechanism can be implemented using a menu of two‐part tariffs with quantity controls.     

Value of and Interaction between Production Postponement and Information Sharing Strategies for Supply Chain Firms

We analyze the value of and interaction between production postponement and information sharing, which are two distinct strategies to reduce manufacturers’ uncertainty about demand. In both single‐level and two‐level supply chains, from the manufacturer's perspective, while information sharing is always valuable, production postponement can sometimes be detrimental. Furthermore, the value of production postponement is not merely driven by savings in inventory holding cost as postponement enables the manufacturer to avoid both excess and shortfall in production. We find that production postponement and information sharing strategies may substitute, complement, or conflict with each other, depending on the extent of the increase in the unit production cost when production is postponed. In a two‐level supply chain, from the retailer's perspective, information sharing and production postponement can be beneficial or detrimental. When information sharing is beneficial to the retailer, the retailer always shares her demand information with the manufacturer voluntarily. In addition, this voluntary information sharing is truthful because inflated or deflated demand information hurts the retailer through a higher wholesale price or a stock‐out. However, the retailer never shares her demand information voluntarily if the manufacturer has already adopted production postponement because production postponement and information sharing strategies always conflict with each other. Even when the retailer does not benefit from information sharing, we show that the manufacturer can always design an incentive mechanism to induce the retailer to share the demand information, irrespective of whether the manufacturer has already implemented production postponement or not. The above findings underscore the need for a careful assessment of demand uncertainty‐reduction strategies before the supply chain players embark upon them.     

Mean-risk analysis of radio frequency identification technology in supply chain with inventory misplacement: Risk-sharing and coordination

This paper investigates the application of radio frequency identification (RFID) technology to eliminate the misplacement problems in the supply chain, which consists of a risk-neutral manufacturer and a risk-averse retailer. By considering both fixed cost and tag cost of RFID implementation, we study the agents' incentives to adopt RFID in both uncoordinated and coordinated cases. We focus on analyzing the impact of risk attitudes on the agents’ incentives and on the supply chain coordination. The central semi-deviation is adopted to measure the retailer's risk attitude. In the uncoordinated case, we find that, in order to induce the retailer to adopt RFID, the manufacturer must assume more fixed cost if the retailer is more risk-averse. In the coordinated case, we first show that the standard revenue sharing contract does not always coordinate the channel. If the channel is coordinated, we observe that the agents’ incentives will be perfectly aligned and independent of the risk attitudes, if the revenue sharing ratio equals the fixed cost sharing ratio. Then we propose a risk-sharing contract that offers the risk protection to the retailer, to achieve the channel coordination. An interesting finding is that the manufacturer's incentive will not decrease with the tag cost, if she takes much risk from the retailer. The corresponding impacts of RFID adoption on the two contracts are also analyzed in this paper. Finally, a case study in a tobacco industry is presented to show the real RFID cost in practice.