IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/navres/v49y2002i4p376-390.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inventory cost impact of order processing priorities based on demand uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Ananth. V. Iyer

Abstract

We evaluate an approach to decrease inventory costs at retail inventory locations that share a production facility. The retail locations sell the same product but differ in the variance of retail demand. Inventory policies at retail locations generate replenishment orders for the production facility. The production facility carries no finished goods inventory. Thus, production lead time for an order is the sojourn time in a single server queueing system. This lead time affects inventory costs at retail locations. We examine the impact of moving from a First Come First Served (FCFS) production rule for orders arriving at the production facility to a rule in which we provide non‐preemptive priority (PR) to orders from retail locations with higher demand uncertainty. We provide three approximations for the ratio of inventory costs under PR and FCFS and use them to identify conditions under which PR decreases retail inventory costs over FCFS. We then use a Direct Approach to establish conditions when PR decreases retail inventory costs over FCFS. We extend the results to orders from locations that differ in the mean and variance of demand uncertainty. The analysis suggests that tailoring lead times to product demand characteristics may decrease system inventory costs. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Naval Research Logistics 49: 376–390, 2002; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/nav.10016

Suggested Citation

  • Ananth. V. Iyer, 2002. "Inventory cost impact of order processing priorities based on demand uncertainty," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(4), pages 376-390, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:navres:v:49:y:2002:i:4:p:376-390
    DOI: 10.1002/nav.10016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/nav.10016
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/nav.10016?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. S. L. Albin, 1982. "On Poisson Approximations for Superposition Arrival Processes in Queues," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 126-137, February.
    2. Guillermo Gallego, 1998. "New Bounds and Heuristics for (Q, r) Policies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(2), pages 219-233, February.
    3. Donald D. Eisenstein & Ananth V. Iyer, 1996. "Separating Logistics Flows in the Chicago Public School System," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(2), pages 265-273, April.
    4. Yu-Sheng Zheng & Paul Zipkin, 1990. "A Queueing Model to Analyze the Value of Centralized Inventory Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(2), pages 296-307, April.
    5. Ananth V. Iyer & Linus E. Schrage, 1992. "Analysis of the Deterministic (s, S) Inventory Problem," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(9), pages 1299-1313, September.
    6. Williams, T. M., 1984. "Special products and uncertainty in production/inventory systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 46-54, January.
    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. Apurva Jain, 2006. "Priority and dynamic scheduling in a make‐to‐stock queue with hyperexponential demand," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(5), pages 363-382, August.

    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. S. Rajagopalan, 2002. "Make to Order or Make to Stock: Model and Application," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(2), pages 241-256, February.
    2. Ananth V. Iyer & Apurva Jain, 2004. "Modeling the Impact of Merging Capacity in Production-Inventory Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(8), pages 1082-1094, August.
    3. Xin, Linwei & Goldberg, David A., 2021. "Time (in)consistency of multistage distributionally robust inventory models with moment constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(3), pages 1127-1141.
    4. Arreola-Risa, Antonio, 1996. "Integrated multi-item production-inventory systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 326-340, March.
    5. Apurva Jain, 2006. "Priority and dynamic scheduling in a make‐to‐stock queue with hyperexponential demand," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(5), pages 363-382, August.
    6. Tielemans, Peter F. J. & Kuik, Roelof, 1996. "An exploration of models that minimize leadtime through batching of arrived orders," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 374-389, December.
    7. Georgia Perakis & Guillaume Roels, 2008. "Regret in the Newsvendor Model with Partial Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 188-203, February.
    8. Hill, R.M. & Seifbarghy, M. & Smith, D.K., 2007. "A two-echelon inventory model with lost sales," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 753-766, September.
    9. Armero, Carmen & Conesa, David, 2004. "Statistical performance of a multiclass bulk production queueing system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 649-661, November.
    10. Flip Klijn & Marco Slikker, 2004. "Distribution Center Consolidation Games," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 602.04, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    11. Xuan Wang & Jiawei Zhang, 2015. "Process Flexibility: A Distribution-Free Bound on the Performance of k -Chain," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 63(3), pages 555-571, June.
    12. Ioannis Ch. Paschalidis & Yong Liu, 2003. "Large Deviations-Based Asymptotics for Inventory Control in Supply Chains," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 51(3), pages 437-460, June.
    13. Jain, Apurva, 2007. "Value of capacity pooling in supply chains with heterogeneous customers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 239-260, February.
    14. Marcus Ang & Karl Sigman & Jing-Sheng Song & Hanqin Zhang, 2017. "Closed-Form Approximations for Optimal ( r , q ) and ( S , T ) Policies in a Parallel Processing Environment," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(5), pages 1414-1428, October.
    15. Morabito, Reinaldo & de Souza, Mauricio C. & Vazquez, Mariana, 2014. "Approximate decomposition methods for the analysis of multicommodity flow routing in generalized queuing networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(3), pages 618-629.
    16. M. Rosário Moreira & Rui Alves, 2006. "Does Order Negotiation Improve The Job-Shop Workload Control?," FEP Working Papers 213, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    17. Beemsterboer, Bart & Land, Martin & Teunter, Ruud, 2016. "Hybrid MTO-MTS production planning: An explorative study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(2), pages 453-461.
    18. Thangam, A. & Uthayakumar, R., 2008. "A two-level supply chain with partial backordering and approximated Poisson demand," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 228-242, May.
    19. Soman, Chetan Anil & Pieter van Donk, Dirk & Gaalman, Gerard, 2006. "Comparison of dynamic scheduling policies for hybrid make-to-order and make-to-stock production systems with stochastic demand," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 441-453, December.
    20. Frank Chen & Tong Wang & Tommy Xu, 2005. "Integrated Inventory Replenishment and Temporal Shipment Consolidation: A Comparison of Quantity-Based and Time-Based Models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 135(1), pages 197-210, March.

    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:navres:v:49:y:2002:i:4:p:376-390. 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://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6750 .

    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.