IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijlsma/v34y2019i1p1-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-based evaluation of different processing rules for backlog and load-building queues in multi-echelon supply chains

Author

Listed:
  • Tarek Al-Hawari
  • Khalid Aram
  • Hazem Smadi

Abstract

Backlog and load-building queues introduce delay to supply chains which increase the expected lead time of orders. This study aims to investigate the effects of implementing priority rules on backlog and load-building queues, and the effects of applying different load-building methods on the performance of multi-echelon supply chains based on cost and time measures. Further, the study discovers the impact of improving the lead time of orders on the total cost of multi-echelon supply chains. The study was applied on a two-echelon distribution network that includes one central warehouse, six retailers, and four item types. Customer satisfaction costs were incorporated in the cost structure of the studied network through applying penalties on untimely order deliveries based on delivery windows. A discrete-event simulation model was used to run multiple scenarios of implementing queue priority rules and load-building methods. Results indicated that applying priority rule on backlog queues and altering load building methods are effective in decreasing the average lead time of orders, while they had minimal impact on the total cost of retailers.

Suggested Citation

  • Tarek Al-Hawari & Khalid Aram & Hazem Smadi, 2019. "Cost-based evaluation of different processing rules for backlog and load-building queues in multi-echelon supply chains," International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 34(1), pages 1-28.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijlsma:v:34:y:2019:i:1:p:1-28
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=102061
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:ids:ijlsma:v:34:y:2019:i:1:p:1-28. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=134 .

    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.