IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jnddns/v2016y2016i1n6716058.html

Backup Sourcing Decisions for Coping with Supply Disruptions under Long‐Term Horizons

Author

Listed:
  • Jing Hou
  • Lijun Sun

Abstract

This paper studies a buyer’s inventory control problem under a long‐term horizon. The buyer has one major supplier that is prone to disruption risks and one backup supplier with higher wholesale price. Two kinds of sourcing methods are available for the buyer: single sourcing with/without contingent supply and dual sourcing. In contingent sourcing, the backup supplier is capacitated and/or has yield uncertainty, whereas in dual sourcing the backup supplier has an incentive to offer output flexibility during disrupted periods. The buyer’s expected cost functions and the optimal base‐stock levels using each sourcing method under long‐term horizon are obtained, respectively. The effects of three risk parameters, disruption probability, contingent capacity or uncertainty, and backup flexibility, are examined using comparative studies and numerical computations. Four sourcing methods, namely, single sourcing with contingent supply, dual sourcing, and single sourcing from either of the two suppliers, are also compared. These findings can be used as a valuable guideline for companies to select an appropriate sourcing strategy under supply disruption risks.

Suggested Citation

  • Jing Hou & Lijun Sun, 2016. "Backup Sourcing Decisions for Coping with Supply Disruptions under Long‐Term Horizons," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2016(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jnddns:v:2016:y:2016:i:1:n:6716058
    DOI: 10.1155/2016/6716058
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6716058
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1155/2016/6716058?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Parlar, Mahmut & Perry, David, 1995. "Analysis of a (Q, r, T) inventory policy with deterministic and random yields when future supply is uncertain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 431-443, July.
    2. Parlar, Mahmut, 1997. "Continuous-review inventory problem with random supply interruptions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 366-385, June.
    3. Yu, Haisheng & Zeng, Amy Z. & Zhao, Lindu, 2009. "Single or dual sourcing: decision-making in the presence of supply chain disruption risks," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 788-800, August.
    4. Brian Tomlin, 2006. "On the Value of Mitigation and Contingency Strategies for Managing Supply Chain Disruption Risks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(5), pages 639-657, May.
    5. Sawik, Tadeusz, 2011. "Selection of supply portfolio under disruption risks," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 194-208, April.
    6. Ruiz-Torres, Alex J. & Mahmoodi, Farzad, 2007. "The optimal number of suppliers considering the costs of individual supplier failures," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 104-115, February.
    7. Berger, Paul D. & Gerstenfeld, Arthur & Zeng, Amy Z., 2004. "How many suppliers are best? A decision-analysis approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 9-15, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Faiza Hamdi & Ahmed Ghorbel & Faouzi Masmoudi & Lionel Dupont, 2018. "Optimization of a supply portfolio in the context of supply chain risk management: literature review," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 763-788, April.
    2. Pritee Ray & Mamata Jenamani, 2016. "Sourcing decision under disruption risk with supply and demand uncertainty: A newsvendor approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 237(1), pages 237-262, February.
    3. Sawik, Tadeusz, 2013. "Selection of resilient supply portfolio under disruption risks," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 259-269.
    4. Pritee Ray & Mamata Jenamani, 2016. "Sourcing decision under disruption risk with supply and demand uncertainty: A newsvendor approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 237(1), pages 237-262, February.
    5. Tadeusz Sawik, 2018. "Selection of a dynamic supply portfolio under delay and disruption risks," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(1-2), pages 760-782, January.
    6. Ray, Pritee & Jenamani, Mamata, 2016. "Mean-variance analysis of sourcing decision under disruption risk," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 679-689.
    7. Sarkar, Ashutosh & Mohapatra, Pratap K.J., 2009. "Determining the optimal size of supply base with the consideration of risks of supply disruptions," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 122-135, May.
    8. Li, Shanshan & He, Yong & Chen, Lujie, 2017. "Dynamic strategies for supply disruptions in production-inventory systems," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 88-101.
    9. Preetam Basu & Soumita Ghosh & Milan Kumar, 2019. "Supplier ratings and dynamic sourcing strategies to mitigate supply disruption risks," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 46(1), pages 41-57, March.
    10. Zeng, Amy Z. & Xia, Yu, 2015. "Building a mutually beneficial partnership to ensure backup supply," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 77-91.
    11. Meena, P.L. & Sarmah, S.P. & Sarkar, A., 2011. "Sourcing decisions under risks of catastrophic event disruptions," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1058-1074.
    12. Wagner, Stephan M. & Bode, Christoph & Koziol, Philipp, 2009. "Supplier default dependencies: Empirical evidence from the automotive industry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(1), pages 150-161, November.
    13. Maheswar Singh Mahapatra & Pravash Chandra Pradhan & J. K. Jha, 2022. "Sourcing decisions with order allocation under supply disruption risk considering quantitative and qualitative criteria," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 3291-3333, September.
    14. Roni, Mohammad S. & Jin, Mingzhou & Eksioglu, Sandra D., 2015. "A hybrid inventory management system responding to regular demand and surge demand," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 190-200.
    15. Fattahi, Mohammad, 2021. "Resilient procurement planning for supply chains: A case study for sourcing a critical mineral material," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    16. Schmitt, Amanda J. & Sun, Siyuan Anthony & Snyder, Lawrence V. & Shen, Zuo-Jun Max, 2015. "Centralization versus decentralization: Risk pooling, risk diversification, and supply chain disruptions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 201-212.
    17. Xia, Yu, 2011. "Competitive strategies and market segmentation for suppliers with substitutable products," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 210(2), pages 194-203, April.
    18. Liu, Ming & Liu, Zhongzheng & Chu, Feng & Dolgui, Alexandre & Chu, Chengbin & Zheng, Feifeng, 2022. "An optimization approach for multi-echelon supply chain viability with disruption risk minimization," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    19. Mohammaddust, Faeghe & Rezapour, Shabnam & Farahani, Reza Zanjirani & Mofidfar, Mohammad & Hill, Alex, 2017. "Developing lean and responsive supply chains: A robust model for alternative risk mitigation strategies in supply chain designs," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(PC), pages 632-653.
    20. Saeed Poormoaied & Ece Zeliha Demirci, 2021. "Analysis of an inventory system with emergency ordering option at the time of supply disruption," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 43(4), pages 1007-1045, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:jnddns:v:2016:y:2016:i:1:n:6716058. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/3059 .

    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.