Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction:
If we observe closely, inventories can be found everywhere. We don’t know since
when ants and squirrels are keeping inventories of their food supplies. And we don’t
know how they learned to keep an account of these inventories. Not only wildlife but
also humans have been smart enough to realize the benefits of inventories. Since
stone-ages we have been carrying inventories and managing them. But, the
development of modern inventory management principles began when Harris (1913)
derived the Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) formula. EOQ assumes that demand
occurs at known, constant rate and supply fulfills the replenishment order after a
fixed lead time. Unfortunately, the real world is not as ideal as that. In reality,
demand rate is rarely constant; hard-to-predict market is common in most practical
situations. Also, unpredictable events in supply systems can cause unpredictable
delays in replenishments. Moreover, in current times when outsourcing is at the
centre stage, complex and longer supply chains magnify the length and variability of
lead times (Welborn, 2008). Although in the early days researchers acknowledged the
necessity for considering uncertainties present in the real world, the rigorous work
on inventory control models with stochastic features really began in 1950s. The
classic book by Hadley and Whitin (1963), comprehends the research work done in
this field to that date. This fundamental research done in those early days has had a
pivotal effect on the subsequent developments in the field of inventory theory.
An article by Lee (2002) presents ‘the uncertainty framework’, which considers
dimensions of demand and supply uncertainties. This framework can be a simple but
powerful way to characterize a product; which can be useful in devising an
appropriate supply chain strategy for that product. Uncertainties in demand and
supply can result in excessive inventories and deteriorated customer service,
indicating out of control supply chain. In the presence of uncertainties, it is difficult
to foresee the final effects of the actions taken and hence to manage the inventories
efficiently. In general, it is observed that stochastic lead times and demand have their
greatest impact in combination (Zipkin, 2000). In this era of outsourcing and/or off-
shoring longer lead times are common, especially because the transportation time
might be considerable. Usually, long lead times and uncertain demand hamper the
performance of inventory control systems. Also, there are hardly any supply
processes which have completely avoided the issues of limited capacity and
unpredictable quality. These issues have even more pronounced effects in the
presence of stochastic lead times. Hence, considering further stochastic features in
inventory control models will bring our study closer to practical problems.
1 of 7
Abhijit B. Bendre Thesis Proposal, 18/08/2008
Description of subprojects:
A. Base-stock policies for the lost-sales case under exogenous and endogenous, sequential
supply systems.
It is a challenge for any inventory policy to manage ubiquitous uncertain demand as
well as supply with uncertain lead times, while achieving acceptable service levels at
minimum total costs and it is particularly difficult for the lost-sales case. Hence, the
purpose of this study is to obtain a better understanding of the performance of
widely used base-stock policy for the lost-sales case under different stochastic lead-
time regimes. The base-stock policy is sometimes also referred to as an (S-1, S)
system with S-1 corresponding to a reorder point and S being the order-up-to level.
In this subproject, we first classify different lead-time regimes. The matrix in Figure 1
aptly presents the classification of lead-time regimes under uncertainty. Then for this
paper we focus on endogenous and exogenous regimes and specifically consider
dependent sequential lead times (models IV and VI).
2 of 7
Abhijit B. Bendre Thesis Proposal, 18/08/2008
B. Base-stock policies for the lost-sales case under sequential and non-sequential supply
systems.
The subproject for this paper is inspired by the classification of lead-time regimes,
presented in Figure 1. In reference to this figure, we plan to compare performance of
the base-stock policy for models II vs. IV and models V vs. VI. Hence, we compare
the performance of exogenous supply systems, which have sequential and non-
sequential lead times. We also plan to conduct the same kind of comparison for
endogenous supply systems. For this subproject we restrict our focus to dependent
lead times and postpone work on independent lead times for future.
In the literature, there is an ongoing debate on whether lead times with crossovers or
sequential lead times represent the most realistic characteristic of real-life inventory
systems under supply uncertainty. In practice both order crossovers and sequential
3 of 7
Abhijit B. Bendre Thesis Proposal, 18/08/2008
4 of 7
Abhijit B. Bendre Thesis Proposal, 18/08/2008
D. Lost-sales case and base-stock policy with information about supply condition.
During the last decade, flexible supply chains have attracted tremendous attention.
In this era of globalisation, firms are serving a wide spectrum of market
environments with diverse and uncertain demand patterns. The retail sector has
always been in the trenches facing these diverse demands with low forecast accuracy,
and at the same time trying to avoid lost sales while keeping the inventory levels
low. Fisher (1997) presents the effect of such demand patterns on the retail sector and
the significance of flexible supply chains for running an efficient business in such a
market environment. One of the virtues of flexible supply chains, which have always
been taken for granted, is the market responsive supply system. As discussed in
Song et al. (1996), the supply condition responsive replenishment ordering systems
can also contribute a great deal in achieving cost efficient flexibility in supply chains.
Das and Abdel-Malek (2003) argue that in order to achieve such a responsive
ordering system, suppliers also need to accommodate flexible order sizes. In Song et
al. (1996) an inventory control model with backorders is presented, which includes a
supply system that evolves over time, as do the replenishment lead times. Due to
shared supply information, parameters of the inventory control model changes
according to current supply conditions. The purpose of this subproject is to
formulate a similar inventory model for the case of lost sales.
In this subproject, we plan to focus on base-stock type policies. We assume that the
supply system is exogenous and that it processes orders sequentially. Depending on
the complexity of the problem and the availability of time, we hope to consider
stochastic demand as well. As suggested by Song and Zipkin (1996), Markov decision
processes can be an efficient way to model this problem. Obviously, as many
fundamental relations from the backorder case do not apply in the case of lost sales,
actual modelling of the problem could become quite complicated. As a result we
hope to formulate a model, from which it is possible to compute a base-stock type of
policy that gives the lowest average total cost.
5 of 7
Abhijit B. Bendre Thesis Proposal, 18/08/2008
longer and more uncertain order replenishment lead times. This can seriously affect
the business performance by not only elevating the average inventory-in-transit
level, but also by deteriorating the service levels when the delivery promises are not
kept. Hence, flexible transportation may facilitate the optimization of total cost for
outsourcing. To squeeze transportation time whenever it is necessary, Stalk (2006)
also recognizes the need for appropriate selection of transportation options at the
correct point of transit. Hence, it might be of great practical significance to formulate
a formal model which helps in identifying an appropriate transportation option at
each transit point.
Basically we need to develop a model, which keeps track of an order and finds the
best possible transportation alternative based on the information available about the
current status of an order. This model should find best possible set of transportation
alternatives, which can trade off inventory carrying and transportation costs with
shortage cost and result in least possible total cost. This research idea is still in its
infancy; hence at this stage we can not exactly identify the solution method for this
problem. The order is going through the transition of states during transportation
and decisions have to be made based on these states. So, we recon that Markov
Decision Process might be one way to find the solution for this research problem.
References
Corsten, D and Gruen, T (2004). Stockouts cause walkouts, Harvard Business Review,
82(5): 26-28
Das, S K and Abdel-Malek L (2003). Modeling the flexibility of order quantities and
lead-times in supply chains, International Journal of Production Economics, 85(2):
171-181
Fisher, M (1997). What is the right supply chain for your product?, Harvard Business
Review, 75(2): 105-116
Hadley, G and Whitin, T M (1963). Analysis of Inventory Systems, Prentice Hall, Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ
Harris, F (1913). How many parts to make at once. Factory, The Magazine of
Management, 10: 135-136, 152
Johansen, S G and Thorstenson, A (2004). The (r, q) policy for the lost-sales inventory
system when more than one order may be outstanding, Working Paper L-2004-03,
Aarhus School of Business, University of Aarhus
Lee H L (2002). Aligning supply chain strategies with product uncertainties,
California Management Review, 44(3): 105-119
Riezebos, J. (2006). Inventory order crossover, International Journal of Production
Economics, 104(2): 666–675
Song, J.-S. and Zipkin, P.H. (1996). Inventory control with information about supply
conditions, Management Science, 42(10): 1409-1419
Stalk, G Jr (2006). The costly secret of China sourcing, Harvard Business Review, 84(2):
64-66
6 of 7
Abhijit B. Bendre Thesis Proposal, 18/08/2008
7 of 7