IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infosf/v15y2013i4d10.1007_s10796-012-9380-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimizing dynamic supply chain formation in supply mesh using CSET model

Author

Listed:
  • Hang Yang

    (University of Macau)

  • Simon Fong

    (University of Macau)

Abstract

A new e-Service model called dynamic supply chain is characterized by their dynamic nature in easily being formed and disbanded with the seamless connectivity provided by e-Marketplace. The new term “supply mesh” was coined to represent this virtual community of companies in which dynamic supply chains, as per project (also known as make-to-order), are formed across different tiers of suppliers. In a supply mesh, a dynamic supply chain can be formed vertically, from the top to the bottom layers, mediating different companies for a project. Companies that are on the same level laterally are usually competitors, and the companies that are linked vertically as supply chains are trading partners. From a global view, the companies that are connected in the supply mesh can be viewed as individual entities that have self-interest. They may compete for survival as well as collaborate with each other for jobs. Given such complex relations the challenge is to find an optimal group of members for a dynamic supply chain in the supply mesh. A multi-agent model called the collaborative single machine earliness/tardiness (CSET) model was recently proposed for the optimal formation of make-to-order supply chains. This paper investigates the possibilities of applying CSET in a supply mesh, and the corresponding allocation schemes are experimentally studied in simulations. One scheme called Cost-driven principle leads to destructive competition while the other one namely Pareto-optimal evolves into a cooperative competition that tries to mutually benefit every participant. The results, based on samples from the U.S. textile industry, show that a cooperative competition scheme is superior in terms of optimal allocation, which obtains maximum satisfaction for all participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Hang Yang & Simon Fong, 2013. "Optimizing dynamic supply chain formation in supply mesh using CSET model," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 569-588, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:15:y:2013:i:4:d:10.1007_s10796-012-9380-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10796-012-9380-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10796-012-9380-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10796-012-9380-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carsten Homburg & Christoph Schneeweiss, 2000. "Negotiations Within Supply Chains," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 47-59, May.
    2. Chunlin Li & Layuan Li, 2012. "Collaboration among mobile agents for efficient energy allocation in mobile grid," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 711-723, July.
    3. Arvind Rangaswamy & G. Richard Shell, 1997. "Using Computers to Realize Joint Gains in Negotiations: Toward an "Electronic Bargaining Table"," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(8), pages 1147-1163, August.
    4. Rong Liu & Akhil Kumar, 2011. "Leveraging information sharing to configure supply chains," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 139-151, March.
    5. Clyde Holsapple & Hsiangchu Lai & Andrew Whinston, 1997. "Implications of Negotiation Theory for Research and Development of Negotiation Support Systems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 255-274, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Casey K. Fung & Patrick C. K. Hung, 2013. "Information and knowledge management in online rich presence services," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 521-523, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chulhwan Chris Bang, 2015. "Information systems frontiers: Keyword analysis and classification," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 217-237, February.
    2. Durugbo, Christopher & Tiwari, Ashutosh & Alcock, Jeffrey R., 2013. "Modelling information flow for organisations: A review of approaches and future challenges," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 597-610.
    3. Shivam Gupta & Vinayak A. Drave & Surajit Bag & Zongwei Luo, 2019. "Leveraging Smart Supply Chain and Information System Agility for Supply Chain Flexibility," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 547-564, June.
    4. Johannes Gettinger & Michael Filzmoser & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2016. "Why can’t we settle again? Analysis of factors that influence agreement prospects in the post-settlement phase," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 86(4), pages 413-440, May.
    5. Kaushal Chari & Manish Agrawal, 2007. "Multi-Issue Automated Negotiations Using Agents," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 588-595, November.
    6. Yen-Chun Chou & Benjamin B. M. Shao, 2023. "An Empirical Study of Information Technology Capabilities to Enable Value Chain Activities and Interfaces," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 1533-1547, August.
    7. Schilling, Martin S. & Mulford, Matthew, 2007. "In search of value-for-money in collective bargaining: an analytic-interactive mediation process," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 22694, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Patton, Charles & Balakrishnan, P.V. (Sundar), 2012. "Negotiating when outnumbered: Agenda strategies for bargaining with buying teams," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 280-291.
    9. Rudolf Vetschera & Michael Filzmoser & Ronald Mitterhofer, 2014. "An Analytical Approach to Offer Generation in Concession-Based Negotiation Processes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 71-99, January.
    10. G.E. Kersten & S.J. Noronha, 1998. "Negotiation and the Web: Users' Perception and Acceptance," Working Papers ir98002, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    11. Carraro, Carlo & Marchiori, Carmen & Sgobbi, Alessandra, 2005. "Applications of negotiation theory to water issues," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3641, The World Bank.
    12. Eva-Maria Pesendorfer & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2006. "Hot Versus Cool Behavioural Styles in Electronic Negotiations: The Impact of Communication Mode," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 141-155, March.
    13. Muhammed-Fatih Kaya, 2022. "Pattern Labelling of Business Communication Data," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(6), pages 1203-1234, December.
    14. Rudolf Vetschera, 2006. "Preference Structures of Negotiators and Negotiation Outcomes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 111-125, March.
    15. Michael Ströbel & Christof Weinhardt, 2003. "The Montreal Taxonomy for Electronic Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 143-164, March.
    16. Eva-Maria Pesendorfer & Sabine T. Koeszegi, 2007. "Social Embeddedness in Electronic Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 399-415, July.
    17. Rajiv D. Banker & Robert J. Kauffman, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: The Evolution of Research on Information Systems: A Fiftieth-Year Survey of the Literature in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(3), pages 281-298, March.
    18. Johannes S. Timmermans & Giampiero E.G. Beroggi, 2004. "An Experimental Assessment of Coleman's Linear System of Action for Supporting Policy Negotiations," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 267-285, November.
    19. Ching-Fen Lee & Pao-Long Chang, 2008. "Evaluations of Tactics for Automated Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 515-539, November.
    20. Ingmar Geiger, 2020. "From Letter to Twitter: A Systematic Review of Communication Media in Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 207-250, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:15:y:2013:i:4:d:10.1007_s10796-012-9380-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.