4.6 Article

Dual sourcing: Creating and utilizing flexible capacities with a second supply source

期刊

PRODUCTION AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT
卷 31, 期 7, 页码 2789-2805

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/poms.13715

关键词

capacity reservation; convexity; dual sourcing; dynamic programming; inventory management

资金

  1. Chazen Institute for Global Business
  2. Hong Kong Research Grants Council (RGC) [ECS26501021]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We study a finite horizon, single product, periodic review inventory system with two supply sources and a salvage option. We analyze the optimal procurement strategy and capacity configuration based on different lead times and two-part capacity contracts. Our results provide insights into effective heuristics and upper and lower bounds for general lead time combinations.
We study a finite horizon, single product, periodic review inventory system with two supply sources and a salvage option. These supply sources are typically capacitated and capacity levels often need to be reserved or installed in advance of the operational planning horizon. The supply sources may thus be differentiated by their lead times, capacities, and fixed and variable order costs. Salvage options allow for inventory reductions and incur fixed cost and variable revenues. We first analyze the tactical problem of determining an optimal procurement strategy under given capacity profiles at the two suppliers. We then address the strategic model in which optimal capacity profiles, both static and dynamically adjusted, are obtained based on two-part capacity contracts. We characterize the structure of optimal procurement strategies when the lead times of the two suppliers differ by a single period and the lead time for salvage opportunities matches that of one of the suppliers. For general lead time combinations, we show that the optimal procurement strategies satisfy monotonicity and limited sensitivity properties, and construct effective heuristics and upper and lower bounds based on our structural results.

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