IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v268y2018i1d10.1007_s10479-017-2482-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Order allocation of logistics service supply chain with fairness concern and demand updating: model analysis and empirical examination

Author

Listed:
  • Weihua Liu

    (Tianjin University)

  • Shuqing Wang

    (Tianjin University)

  • DongLei Zhu

    (Tianjin University)

  • Di Wang

    (Tianjin University)

  • Xinran Shen

    (Tianjin University)

Abstract

Regarding a two-echelon supply chain consisting of a logistics service integrator (LSI) and several functional logistics service providers (FLSPs), this paper establishes a two-stage order allocation model considering demand updating and the FLSPs’ fairness preferences. This model is a multi-objective programming model, whose goal is to maximize profits of the LSI and the total utility of FLSPs. The ideal point method is used to obtain the optimal solution. In the numerical example, the impacts of FLSPs’ behavioral parameters and demand update parameters on the order allocation in the social services network are discussed. Besides, multi-methodological method is used to verify the theoretical perspectives through an empirical study of Tianjin SND Logistics Company. Our study obtains a few important conclusions. For example, when demand of the second stage is updated, there is an optimal updating time maximizing the supply chain performance. Increased demand of the second stage results in greater supply chain performance. When the demand during the second stage decreases, the bigger the difference of the fairness preference coefficients among FLSPs, the greater the LSI’s profits and the lower the FLSPs’ total utility will be. However, the difference of the fairness preference coefficients among FLSPs has little influence on the LSI’s profits and total utility of the FLSPs, when the demand during the second stage increases.

Suggested Citation

  • Weihua Liu & Shuqing Wang & DongLei Zhu & Di Wang & Xinran Shen, 2018. "Order allocation of logistics service supply chain with fairness concern and demand updating: model analysis and empirical examination," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 268(1), pages 177-213, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:268:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-017-2482-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-017-2482-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-017-2482-7
    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/s10479-017-2482-7?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. Falk, Armin & Fischbacher, Urs, 2006. "A theory of reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 293-315, February.
    2. Ghodsypour, S. H. & O'Brien, C., 1998. "A decision support system for supplier selection using an integrated analytic hierarchy process and linear programming," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 199-212, September.
    3. Liu, Weihua & Wang, Yijia, 2015. "Quality control game model in logistics service supply chain based on different combinations of risk attitude," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 181-191.
    4. Zhang, Juliang & Shou, Biying & Chen, Jian, 2013. "Postponed product differentiation with demand information update," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(2), pages 529-540.
    5. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    6. Yun Zhou & Lei Zhao & Xiaobo Zhao & Jianhua Jiang, 2011. "A supplier selection and order allocation problem with stochastic demands," International Journal of Systems Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(8), pages 1323-1338.
    7. Haresh Gurnani & Christopher S. Tang, 1999. "Note: Optimal Ordering Decisions with Uncertain Cost and Demand Forecast Updating," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(10), pages 1456-1462, October.
    8. Andy A. Tsay, 1999. "The Quantity Flexibility Contract and Supplier-Customer Incentives," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(10), pages 1339-1358, October.
    9. Karen L. Donohue, 2000. "Efficient Supply Contracts for Fashion Goods with Forecast Updating and Two Production Modes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(11), pages 1397-1411, November.
    10. Raymond Fisman & Shachar Kariv & Daniel Markovits, 2007. "Individual Preferences for Giving," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1858-1876, December.
    11. Tony Haitao Cui & Jagmohan S. Raju & Z. John Zhang, 2007. "Fairness and Channel Coordination," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(8), pages 1303-1314, August.
    12. Ananth. V. Iyer & Mark E. Bergen, 1997. "Quick Response in Manufacturer-Retailer Channels," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 559-570, April.
    13. Vischer, Thomas & Dohmen, Thomas & Falk, Armin & Huffman, David & Schupp, Jürgen & Sunde, Uwe & Wagner, Gert G., 2013. "Validating an Ultra-Short Survey Measure of Patience," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 120(2), pages 142-145.
    14. Demirtas, Ezgi Aktar & Üstün, Özden, 2008. "An integrated multiobjective decision making process for supplier selection and order allocation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 76-90, February.
    15. Charness, Gary & Rabin, Matthew, 2001. "Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt4qz9k8vg, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    16. Gary D. Eppen & Ananth. V. Iyer, 1997. "Backup Agreements in Fashion Buying---The Value of Upstream Flexibility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(11), pages 1469-1484, November.
    17. Chen, Haoya & Chen, Jian & Chen, Youhua (Frank), 2006. "A coordination mechanism for a supply chain with demand information updating," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 347-361, September.
    18. Mallik, Suman & Harker, Patrick T., 2004. "Coordinating supply chains with competition: Capacity allocation in semiconductor manufacturing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(2), pages 330-347, December.
    19. Teck-Hua Ho & Xuanming Su, 2009. "Peer-Induced Fairness in Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2022-2049, December.
    20. Gary Charness & Matthew Rabin, 2002. "Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(3), pages 817-869.
    21. Messinger, Paul R., 2016. "The role of fairness in competitive supply chain relationships: An experimental studyAuthor-Name: Choi, Sungchul," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(3), pages 798-813.
    22. Meimei Zheng & Yan Shu & Kan Wu, 2015. "On optimal emergency orders with updated demand forecast and limited supply," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(12), pages 3692-3719, June.
    23. Lin, Rong-Ho, 2012. "An integrated model for supplier selection under a fuzzy situation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(1), pages 55-61.
    24. Zied Jemai & Ayse Sena Eruguz & Evren Sahin & Yves Dallery, 2014. "Optimising reorder intervals and order-up-to levels in guaranteed service supply chains," Post-Print hal-01672392, HAL.
    25. Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
    26. Wang, Yulan & Wallace, Stein W. & Shen, Bin & Choi, Tsan-Ming, 2015. "Service supply chain management: A review of operational models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 247(3), pages 685-698.
    27. Wei, Yihua & Hu, Qiying & Xu, Chen, 2013. "Ordering, pricing and allocation in a service supply chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 590-598.
    28. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
    29. Daniel Gómez & Enrique González–Arangüena & Conrado Manuel & Guillermo Owen & Mónica Pozo & Martha Saboyá, 2008. "The cohesiveness of subgroups in social networks: A view from game theory," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 33-46, February.
    30. Choi, Tsan-Ming & Sethi, Suresh, 2010. "Innovative quick response programs: A review," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(1), pages 1-12, September.
    31. Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
    32. Joseph M. Milner & Meir J. Rosenblatt, 2002. "Flexible supply contracts for short life‐cycle goods: The buyer's perspective," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(1), pages 25-45, February.
    33. Gary D. Eppen & Ananth. V. Iyer, 1997. "Improved Fashion Buying with Bayesian Updates," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 45(6), pages 805-819, December.
    34. Marshall Fisher & Ananth Raman, 1996. "Reducing the Cost of Demand Uncertainty Through Accurate Response to Early Sales," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 87-99, February.
    35. Giannoccaro, Ilaria & Pontrandolfo, Pierpaolo, 2009. "Negotiation of the revenue sharing contract: An agent-based systems approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 558-566, December.
    36. Ghodsypour, S. H. & O'Brien, C., 2001. "The total cost of logistics in supplier selection, under conditions of multiple sourcing, multiple criteria and capacity constraint," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 15-27, August.
    37. Mafakheri, Fereshteh & Breton, Michele & Ghoniem, Ahmed, 2011. "Supplier selection-order allocation: A two-stage multiple criteria dynamic programming approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 52-57, July.
    38. Larsen, Erik R. & Morecroft, John D. W. & Thomsen, Jesper S., 1999. "Complex behaviour in a production-distribution model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 61-74, November.
    39. James Andreoni & John Miller, 2002. "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 737-753, March.
    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. S. Di Luozzo & A. Fronzetti Colladon & M. M. Schiraldi, 2024. "Decoding excellence: Mapping the demand for psychological traits of operations and supply chain professionals through text mining," Papers 2403.17546, arXiv.org.
    2. Qi Wang & Kebing Chen & Shengbin Wang & Xiaogang Cao, 2022. "Optimal decisions in a closed-loop supply chain: fairness concerns, corporate social responsibility and information value," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 309(1), pages 277-304, February.
    3. Wang, Xinyu & Zhang, Yuxing & Zhang, Shuhua, 2024. "Dynamic order allocation in a duopoly hybrid workforce of competition: A machine learning approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 315(2), pages 668-690.
    4. Weihua Liu & Wanying Wei & Xiaoyu Yan & Di Wang, 2019. "Supply Contract Design with Asymmetric Corporate Social Responsibility Cost Information in Service Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-24, March.
    5. Wen Jiang & Li Yuan & Lanjun Wu & Shiyue Guo, 2019. "Carbon emission reduction and profit distribution mechanism of construction supply chain with fairness concern and cap-and-trade," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-23, October.
    6. Sirin Suprasongsin & Pisal Yenradee & Van-Nam Huynh, 2020. "A weight-consistent model for fuzzy supplier selection and order allocation problem," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 587-605, October.
    7. Fuqiang Lu & Liying Wang & Hualing Bi & Zichao Du & Suxin Wang, 2021. "An Improved Revenue Distribution Model for Logistics Service Supply Chain Considering Fairness Preference," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-30, June.
    8. Shen, Bin & Xu, Xiaoyan & Guo, Shu, 2019. "The impacts of logistics services on short life cycle products in a global supply chain," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 153-167.
    9. Haiying Zhou & Wenjing Zhang, 2022. "Choice of Emission Control Technology in Port Areas with Customers’ Low-Carbon Preference," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-19, October.
    10. Wang, Qingwei & Zheng, Meimei & Lee, Ka-Man & Shi, Xiaoqian & Shen, Yichi & Pan, Ershun, 2024. "Optimal product and after-sales service decisions considering risk attitudes under price-dependent uncertain demand," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).

    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. Bart J. Wilson, 2012. "Contra Private Fairness," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 407-435, April.
    2. Nicklisch, Andreas & Wolff, Irenaeus, 2012. "On the nature of reciprocity: Evidence from the ultimatum reciprocity measure," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 892-905.
    3. Cox, James C. & Friedman, Daniel & Gjerstad, Steven, 2007. "A tractable model of reciprocity and fairness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 17-45, April.
    4. Đula, Ivan & Größler, Andreas, 2021. "Inequity aversion in dynamically complex supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 309-322.
    5. Andreas Nicklisch, 2008. "Inequity Aversion, Reciprocity, and Appropriateness in the Ultimatum-Revenge Game," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2008_24, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    6. Adrian Bruhin & Ernst Fehr & Daniel Schunk, 2019. "The many Faces of Human Sociality: Uncovering the Distribution and Stability of Social Preferences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(4), pages 1025-1069.
    7. Christian Korth, 2009. "Reciprocity—An Indirect Evolutionary Analysis," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, in: Fairness in Bargaining and Markets, chapter 0, pages 35-55, Springer.
    8. Andrea Essl & Frauke von Bieberstein & Michael Kosfeld & Markus Kröll, 2018. "Sales Performance and Social Preferences," CESifo Working Paper Series 7030, CESifo.
    9. Thorsten Chmura & Christoph Engel & Markus Englerth, 2013. "Selfishness As a Potential Cause of Crime. A Prison Experiment," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2013_05, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    10. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    11. Erik O. Kimbrough & Alexander Vostroknutov, 2016. "Norms Make Preferences Social," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 608-638, June.
    12. Klaus M. Schmidt, 2011. "Social Preferences and Competition," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43, pages 207-231, August.
    13. Despoina Alempaki & Andrew M. Colman & Felix Kölle & Graham Loomes & Briony D. Pulford, 2022. "Investigating the failure to best respond in experimental games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(2), pages 656-679, April.
    14. Kurt A. Ackermann & Ryan O. Murphy, 2019. "Explaining Cooperative Behavior in Public Goods Games: How Preferences and Beliefs Affect Contribution Levels," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, March.
    15. Pelligra, Vittorio & Stanca, Luca, 2013. "To give or not to give? Equity, efficiency and altruistic behavior in an artefactual field experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 1-9.
    16. Boris van Leeuwen & Ingela Alger, 2024. "Estimating Social Preferences and Kantian Morality in Strategic Interactions," Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(4), pages 665-706.
    17. Jeannette Brosig-Koch & Thomas Riechmann & Joachim Weimann, 2017. "The dynamics of behavior in modified dictator games," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-18, April.
    18. Boris van Leeuwen & Ingela Alger, 2024. "Estimating Social Preferences and Kantian Morality in Strategic Interactions," Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(4), pages 665-706.
    19. Kerschbamer, Rudolf, 2015. "The geometry of distributional preferences and a non-parametric identification approach: The Equality Equivalence Test," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 85-103.
    20. Kovarik, Jaromir, 2009. "Social Preferences - Literature Survey," IKERLANAK 6416, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.

    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:annopr:v:268:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-017-2482-7. 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.