IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/navres/v44y1997i6p515-530.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acceptance sampling, imperfect production, and the optimality of zero defects

Author

Listed:
  • S. Andrew Starbird

Abstract

Acceptance sampling is often used to monitor the quality of raw materials and components when product testing is destructive, time‐consuming, or expensive. In this paper we consider the effect of a buyer‐imposed acceptance sampling policy on the optimal batch size and optimal quality level delivered by an expected cost minimizing supplier. We define quality as the supplier's process capability, i.e., the probability that a unit conforms to all product specifications, and we assume that unit cost is an increasing function of the quality level. We also assume that the supplier faces a known and constant “pass‐through” cost, i.e., a fixed cost per defective unit passed on to the buyer. We show that the acceptance sampling plan has a significant impact on the supplier's optimal quality level, and we derive the conditions under which zero defects (100% conformance) is the policy that minimizes the supplier's expected annual cost. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Naval Research Logistics 44: 515–530, 1997

Suggested Citation

  • S. Andrew Starbird, 1997. "Acceptance sampling, imperfect production, and the optimality of zero defects," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(6), pages 515-530, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:navres:v:44:y:1997:i:6:p:515-530
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6750(199709)44:63.0.CO;2-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6750(199709)44:63.0.CO;2-6
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6750(199709)44:63.0.CO;2-6?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. Evan L. Porteus, 1990. "Note---The Impact of Inspection Delay on Process and Inspection Lot Sizing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(8), pages 999-1007, August.
    2. Evan L. Porteus, 1986. "Optimal Lot Sizing, Process Quality Improvement and Setup Cost Reduction," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 137-144, February.
    3. Mordechai Henig & Yigal Gerchak, 1990. "The Structure of Periodic Review Policies in the Presence of Random Yield," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 634-643, August.
    4. Hau L. Lee & Candace Arai Yano, 1988. "Production Control in Multistage Systems with Variable Yield Losses," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 36(2), pages 269-278, April.
    5. I. D. Hill, 1960. "The Economic Incentive Provided by Sampling Inspection," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 9(2), pages 69-81, June.
    6. P. Whittle, 1954. "Optimum Preventative Sampling," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 197-203, May.
    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. Hong Wan & Xiaowei Xu & Tian Ni, 2013. "The incentive effect of acceptance sampling plans in a supply chain with endogenous product quality," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(2), pages 111-124, March.
    2. Hsieh, Chung-Chi & Lai, Hsing-Hua, 2020. "Pricing and ordering decisions in a supply chain with downward substitution and imperfect process yield," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 95(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. T W Sloan, 2004. "A periodic review production and maintenance model with random demand, deteriorating equipment, and binomial yield," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(6), pages 647-656, June.
    2. Gullu, Refik, 1998. "Base stock policies for production/inventory problems with uncertain capacity levels," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 43-51, February.
    3. B C Giri & T Dohi, 2005. "Exact formulation of stochastic EMQ model for an unreliable production system," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(5), pages 563-575, May.
    4. Kazaz, Burak & Sloan, Thomas W., 2013. "The impact of process deterioration on production and maintenance policies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 227(1), pages 88-100.
    5. Qing Li & Shaohui Zheng, 2006. "Joint Inventory Replenishment and Pricing Control for Systems with Uncertain Yield and Demand," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 696-705, August.
    6. Pollock, Stephen M. & Golhar, Damodar, 1998. "The canning problem revisited: The case of capacitated production and fixed demand," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 105(3), pages 475-482, March.
    7. Shoshana Anily & Avraham Beja & Amit Mendel, 2002. "Optimal Lot Sizes with Geometric Production Yield and Rigid Demand," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 50(3), pages 424-432, June.
    8. Burak Kazaz, 2004. "Production Planning Under Yield and Demand Uncertainty with Yield-Dependent Cost and Price," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 209-224, October.
    9. Asli Sencer Erdem & Mehmet Murat Fadilog̃lu & Süleyman Özekici, 2006. "An EOQ model with multiple suppliers and random capacity," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 101-114, February.
    10. Kök, A. Gürhan & Shang, Kevin H., 2014. "Evaluation of cycle-count policies for supply chains with inventory inaccuracy and implications on RFID investments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(1), pages 91-105.
    11. W. C. Tsai & Neng-Hui Shih & Chih-Hsiung Wang, 2018. "The effects of inspection delay and restoration cost on the optimal inspection and production policy," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 55(1), pages 187-195, March.
    12. Ching‐Chin Chern & Ping Yang, 1999. "Determining a threshold control policy for an imperfect production system with rework jobs," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(3), pages 273-301, April.
    13. Vickson, Raymond G. & Hassini, Elkafi, 2006. "Lot streaming for quality control in two-stage batch production," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 170(3), pages 824-843, May.
    14. Xu, He, 2010. "Managing production and procurement through option contracts in supply chains with random yield," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 306-313, August.
    15. Qi Feng & Zhongjie Ma & Zhaofang Mao & J. George Shanthikumar, 2021. "Multi‐Stage Supply Chain with Production Uncertainty," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(4), pages 921-940, April.
    16. Baker, H. & Ehrhardt, R., 1995. "A dynamic inventory model with random replenishment quantities," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 109-116, February.
    17. Khouja, Moutaz, 1999. "The single-period (news-vendor) problem: literature review and suggestions for future research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 537-553, October.
    18. Abraham Grosfeld-Nir & Yigal Gerchak & Qi-Ming He, 2000. "Manufacturing to Order with Random Yield and Costly Inspection," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 48(5), pages 761-767, October.
    19. Guu, Sy-Ming & Zhang, Alex X., 2003. "The finite multiple lot sizing problem with interrupted geometric yield and holding costs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(3), pages 635-644, March.
    20. Sy-Ming Guu & Chun-Yi Lin, 2018. "The multiple lot sizing problem of a serial production system with interrupted geometric yields, rigid demand and Pentico’s heuristic," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 269(1), pages 167-183, October.

    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:44:y:1997:i:6:p:515-530. 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.