IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Backorder penalty cost coefficient "b": What could it be?


  • Liberopoulos, George
  • Tsikis, Isidoros
  • Delikouras, Stefanos


The classical economic order quantity (EOQ) model with planned penalized backorders (PB) relies on postulating a value for the backorder penalty cost coefficient, b, which is supposed to reflect the intangible adverse effect of the future loss of customer goodwill following a stockout. Recognizing that the effect of the future loss of customer goodwill should be not a direct penalty cost but a change in future demand, Schwartz [1966. A new approach to stockout penalties. Management Science 12(12), B538-B544] modified the classical EOQ-PB model by eliminating the backorder penalty cost term from the objective function and assuming that the long-run demand rate is a decreasing, strictly convex function of the customer's "disappointment factor" (defined as the complement of the demand fill rate) following a stockout, which in turn is an increasing, strictly convex function of the demand fill rate. He called the new model a perturbed demand (PD) model. Schwartz provided convincing justification for his PD model and presented several variations of it in a follow-up paper, but he did not solve any of these models. In this paper, we solve Schwartz's original PD model and its variations, and we discuss the implications of their solutions, thus filling a gap in the literature left by Schwartz. Moreover, having been convinced that Schwartz's approach is more valid than the classical approach for representing the effect of the loss of customer goodwill following a stockout, but also recognizing that the classical approach is far more popular than the PD approach, because of its simplicity and because of tradition, we use the solution of the PD model to infer the value of b in the classical model, thus providing one possible answer to the question, what could b be? A noteworthy implication of the solution of Schwartz's original PD model is that the optimal fill rate is always 0 or 1, rendering the inferred value of b in the classical model 0 or [infinity], respectively. Suspecting that the property of the PD function which is most likely responsible for producing this "bang-bang" type of result is strict convexity, we show that for the case where the PD function is proportional to an integer power, say n, of the fill rate, the optimal fill rate is always 0 or 1, if and only if n>1, in which case the PD function is strictly convex in the fill rate.

Suggested Citation

  • Liberopoulos, George & Tsikis, Isidoros & Delikouras, Stefanos, 2010. "Backorder penalty cost coefficient "b": What could it be?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 166-178, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:123:y:2010:i:1:p:166-178

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Vishal Gaur & Young-Hoon Park, 2007. "Asymmetric Consumer Learning and Inventory Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 227-240, February.
    2. Campo, Katia & Gijsbrechts, Els & Nisol, Patricia, 2004. "Dynamics in consumer response to product unavailability: do stock-out reactions signal response to permanent assortment reductions?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(8), pages 834-843, August.
    3. Muhittin Oral & Michael S. Salvador & Arnold Reisman & Burton V. Dean, 1972. "On the Evaluation of Shortage Costs for Inventory Control of Finished Goods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 344-351, February.
    4. Ernst, Ricardo & Powell, Stephen G., 1995. "Optimal inventory policies under service-sensitive demand," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 316-327, December.
    5. Fitzsimons, Gavan J, 2000. " Consumer Response to Stockouts," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 249-266, September.
    6. Ziv Carmon & J. George Shanthikumar & Tali F. Carmon, 1995. "A Psychological Perspective on Service Segmentation Models: The Significance of Accounting for Consumers' Perceptions of Waiting and Service," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(11), pages 1806-1815, November.
    7. Eric T. Anderson & Gavan J. Fitzsimons & Duncan Simester, 2006. "Measuring and Mitigating the Costs of Stockouts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1751-1763, November.
    8. Argon, Nilay Tanik & Gullu, Refik & Erkip, Nesim, 2001. "Analysis of an inventory system under backorder correlated deterministic demand and geometric supply process," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1-3), pages 247-254, May.
    9. Zhou, Rongrong & Soman, Dilip, 2003. " Looking Back: Exploring the Psychology of Queuing and the Effect of the Number of People Behind," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(4), pages 517-530, March.
    10. B. L. Schwartz, 1970. "Optimal Inventory Policies in Perturbed Demand Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(8), pages 509-518, April.
    11. Piyush Kumar & Manohar U. Kalwani & Maqbool Dada, 1997. "The Impact of Waiting Time Guarantees on Customers' Waiting Experiences," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 295-314.
    12. Urban, Timothy L., 1995. "Inventory models with the demand rate dependent on stock and shortage levels," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 21-28, June.
    13. Tava Lennon Olsen & Rodney P. Parker, 2008. "Inventory Management Under Market Size Dynamics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(10), pages 1805-1821, October.
    14. James D. Dana, Jr. & Nicholas C. Petruzzi, 2001. "Note: The Newsvendor Model with Endogenous Demand," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(11), pages 1488-1497, November.
    15. Noah Gans, 2002. "Customer Loyalty and Supplier Quality Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(2), pages 207-221, February.
    16. Benjamin L. Schwartz, 1966. "A New Approach to Stockout Penalties," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(12), pages 538-544, August.
    17. Willard I. Zangwill, 1969. "A Backlogging Model and a Multi-Echelon Model of a Dynamic Economic Lot Size Production System--A Network Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(9), pages 506-527, May.
    18. Everette S. Gardner, Jr. & David G. Dannenbring, 1979. "Using Optimal Policy Surfaces to Analyze Aggregate Inventory Tradeoffs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(8), pages 709-720, August.
    19. Liming Liu & Weixin Shang & Shaohua Wu, 2007. "Dynamic Competitive Newsvendors with Service-Sensitive Demands," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 84-93, June.
    20. Anantaram Balakrishnan & Michael S. Pangburn & Euthemia Stavrulaki, 2004. ""Stack Them High, Let 'em Fly": Lot-Sizing Policies When Inventories Stimulate Demand," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 630-644, May.
    21. Lode Li, 1992. "The Role of Inventory in Delivery-Time Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(2), pages 182-197, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Levner, Eugene & Perlman, Yael & Cheng, T.C.E. & Levner, Ilya, 2011. "A network approach to modeling the multi-echelon spare-part inventory system with backorders and interval-valued demand," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 43-51, July.
    2. Louly, Mohamed-Aly & Dolgui, Alexandre, 2011. "Optimal time phasing and periodicity for MRP with POQ policy," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(1), pages 76-86, May.
    3. repec:taf:tsysxx:v:46:y:2015:i:11:p:1944-1952 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:eee:ejores:v:263:y:2017:i:3:p:838-863 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Eugene Khmelnitsky & Gonen Singer, 2015. "An optimal inventory management problem with reputation-dependent demand," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 231(1), pages 305-316, August.
    6. Nadjib Brahimi & Tarik Aouam, 2016. "Multi-item production routing problem with backordering: a MILP approach," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(4), pages 1076-1093, February.
    7. Rezaei, Jafar & Davoodi, Mansoor, 2011. "Multi-objective models for lot-sizing with supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 77-86, March.


    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:eee:proeco:v:123:y:2010:i:1:p:166-178. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.