4.5 Article

Supply Chain Inventory Replenishment: The Debiasing Effect of Declarative Knowledge

期刊

DECISION SCIENCES
卷 43, 期 3, 页码 525-546

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2012.00355.x

关键词

Debiasing; Experiment; Inventory; Replenishment; and Training

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previous experimental research demonstrates that inefficient replenishment decision making in the supply chain can be caused by specific judgment and decision biases. Based on the literature we use controlled experiments involving both student subjects and supply chain managers to test debiasing interventions that provide declarative knowledge, which is theorized to enhance the acquisition of procedural knowledge. We first investigate the effects of three debiasing components in a single-echelon setting: knowledge of bullwhip, inventory position (IP), and use of a target order-up-to quantity. Experiment 1 (N = 1,608 decisions by 67 student subjects) using a 2 x 2 x 2 factorial design for the three components finds that the conceptual understanding of IP is salient for efficient replenishment decisions. We next examine the effects of the components in a simulated, multi-echelon, serial supply chain, which introduces the additional complexity of coordination risk. Experiment 2 (N = 3,072 decisions by 128 student subjects) using a 2 x 2 x 2 factorial design finds that although subjects benefit from training components, there is evidence of cognitive overload with an increased quantity of information. Finally we test whether these debiasing components may be an effective training program for practicing supply chain managers who can be expected to have higher levels of procedural knowledge through experience gained in the field. Experiment 3 (N = 864 decisions by 36 supply chain managers) using a 2 x 1 design investigates the effects of an instructional training intervention which includes all three debiasing components and finds the intervention to reduce costs by 14%. We provide avenues for future research and successful practice.

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

4.5
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