4.6 Article

Two Backorder Compensation Mechanisms in Inventory Systems with Impatient Customers

期刊

PRODUCTION AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT
卷 24, 期 10, 页码 1640-1656

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/poms.12360

关键词

strategic customers; compensation mechanism; pricing; auction; make-to-stock; queuing; Nash equilibrium

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71232007, 71072016, 71490723]
  2. Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences in Universities [14JJD630008]
  3. Israel Science Foundation [1015/11]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We study a compensation mechanism design problem with customer-choice behavior in a continuous review setting where the production and demand processes are stochastic. When a stockout occurs, the firm controls backorders on the basis of certain compensation policies. Customers make decisions to maximize their utility, which is decreasing in the price, the waiting time, and the customer's impatience factor. We assume that the impatience factor is private information held by the customer only. Two compensation mechanisms are designed to control backorders, namely uniform compensation and priority auction with an admission price. Under uniform compensation, the firm offers the same discount to all customers, whereas under auction compensation, priority is granted according to the customers' bid prices. We obtain the optimal stockout price and base stock level under each mechanism, and analyze the properties of the respective optimal policies. Assuming linear waiting costs with uniformly distributed impatience factor, we find that the auction mechanism (1) maintains a lower base stock level and results in greater profit and (2) benefits customers with relatively lower or higher impatience factors, but customers with a medium impatience factor may be rendered worse off. We further show that both compensation mechanisms are suitable for products with a high unit profit, a high lost sales penalty cost, and a high holding cost.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据