IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/umagsb/2017024.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the Acceptance of Gain Sharing Methods in Supply Chain Collaboration

Author

Listed:
  • Grigoriev, Alexander

    (QE Operations research, RS: GSBE ETBC)

  • Jung, Verena

    (QE Operations research, RS: GSBE ETBC)

  • Peeters - Rutten, Marianne

    (QE Operations research, RS: GSBE ETBC)

  • Vredeveld, Tjark

    (QE Operations research, RS: GSBE ETBC)

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the acceptance of different gain sharing methods in practice. In addition, the influence of behavioural aspects on the acceptance of these allocation methods is observed. Design/methodology/approach – In order to investigate the research question, a behavioural study is conducted in form of online surveys. The online surveys are performed with manufacturers, logistics service providers (LSPs) and retailers from the Dutch fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) industry. Further, a control group consisting of students is used in order to investigate potential cognitive biases of business practitioners. Findings – Results indicate that the acceptance of a gain sharing method depends on the information availability and cognitive biases. Further, due to a different influence of information availability and varying cognitive biases no gain sharing methods is preferred by all involved parties. Practical implications –The major barrier for the implementation and the success of a SCC is a fair allocation method which is accepted by all parties involved in the SCC. One practical implication of this study to overcome this barrier is to provide each party individually all relevant information. Originality/value – The study extends the work by Cruijssen et al. (2007a) as well as Leng and Parlar (2009) and provides novel insights in the understanding of the acceptance of gain sharing methods through the investigation of the acceptance levels and the integration of behavioural decision-making literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Grigoriev, Alexander & Jung, Verena & Peeters - Rutten, Marianne & Vredeveld, Tjark, 2017. "On the Acceptance of Gain Sharing Methods in Supply Chain Collaboration," Research Memorandum 024, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    • Handle: RePEc:unm:umagsb:2017024
    DOI: 10.26481/umagsb.2017024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/ws/files/16595962/RM17024.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26481/umagsb.2017024?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. Tijs, S.H. & Driessen, T.S.H., 1986. "Game theory and cost allocation problems," Other publications TiSEM 376c24c5-c95d-4d29-96b6-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. Frisk, M. & Göthe-Lundgren, M. & Jörnsten, K. & Rönnqvist, M., 2010. "Cost allocation in collaborative forest transportation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(2), pages 448-458, September.
    3. Cruijssen, Frans & Cools, Martine & Dullaert, Wout, 2007. "Horizontal cooperation in logistics: Opportunities and impediments," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 129-142, March.
    4. SCHMEIDLER, David, 1969. "The nucleolus of a characteristic function game," LIDAM Reprints CORE 44, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    5. Cruijssen, Frans & Cools, Martine & Dullaert, W., 2007. "Horizontal cooperation in logistics: opportunities and impediments," Other publications TiSEM ab29fad8-1faf-422b-826e-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Simon, Herbert A, 1979. "Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(4), pages 493-513, September.
    7. Sterman, John D., 1989. "Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 301-335, June.
    8. Mingming Leng & Mahmut Parlar, 2009. "Allocation of Cost Savings in a Three-Level Supply Chain with Demand Information Sharing: A Cooperative-Game Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 200-213, February.
    9. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    10. Christine Vanovermeire & Dries Vercruysse & Kenneth Sörensen, 2014. "Analysis of different cost allocation methods in a collaborative transport setting," International Journal of Engineering Management and Economics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 4(2), pages 132-150.
    11. S. H. Tijs & T. S. H. Driessen, 1986. "Game Theory and Cost Allocation Problems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(8), pages 1015-1028, August.
    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. Sophie D'Amours & Mikael Rönnqvist, 2013. "An Educational Game in Collaborative Logistics," INFORMS Transactions on Education, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 102-113, January.
    2. Basso, Franco & Guajardo, Mario & Varas, Mauricio, 2020. "Collaborative job scheduling in the wine bottling process," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    3. Defryn, Christof & Sörensen, Kenneth & Cornelissens, Trijntje, 2016. "The selective vehicle routing problem in a collaborative environment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 400-411.
    4. DEFRYN, Christof & SÖRENSEN, Kenneth & CORNELISSENS, Trijntje, 2015. "The selective vehicle routing problem in a collaborative environment," Working Papers 2015006, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    5. DEFRYN, Christof & VANOVERMEIRE, Christine & SÖRENSEN, Kenneth & VAN BREEDAM, Alex & VANNIEUWENHUYSE, Bart & VERSTREPEN, Sven, 2014. "Gain sharing in horizontal logistic collaboration. A case study in the fresh fruit and vegetables sector," Working Papers 2014004, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    6. Behzad Hezarkhani & Marco Slikker & Tom Woensel, 2016. "A competitive solution for cooperative truckload delivery," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 38(1), pages 51-80, January.
    7. Gao, Evelyn & Sowlati, Taraneh & Akhtari, Shaghaygh, 2019. "Profit allocation in collaborative bioenergy and biofuel supply chains," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    8. M. Fiestras-Janeiro & Ignacio García-Jurado & Manuel Mosquera, 2011. "Cooperative games and cost allocation problems," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 19(1), pages 1-22, July.
    9. Defryn, Christof & Sörensen, Kenneth & Dullaert, Wout, 2019. "Integrating partner objectives in horizontal logistics optimisation models," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 1-12.
    10. Zhang, Ranran & Ma, Weimin & Si, Hongyun & Liu, Jinjin & Liao, Le, 2021. "Cooperative game analysis of coordination mechanisms under fairness concerns of a green retailer," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    11. Kellner, Florian & Schneiderbauer, Miriam, 2019. "Further insights into the allocation of greenhouse gas emissions to shipments in road freight transportation: The pollution routing game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 296-313.
    12. Ramaekers, Katrien & Verdonck, Lotte & Caris, An & Meers, Dries & Macharis, Cathy, 2017. "Allocating collaborative costs in multimodal barge networks for freight bundling," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 56-69.
    13. Lozano, S. & Moreno, P. & Adenso-Díaz, B. & Algaba, E., 2013. "Cooperative game theory approach to allocating benefits of horizontal cooperation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(2), pages 444-452.
    14. Skovsgaard, Lise & Jensen, Ida Græsted, 2018. "Recent trends in biogas value chains explained using cooperative game theory," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 503-522.
    15. Mario Guajardo & Kurt Jörnsten & Mikael Rönnqvist, 2016. "Constructive and blocking power in collaborative transportation," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 38(1), pages 25-50, January.
    16. Molenbruch, Yves & Braekers, Kris & Caris, An, 2017. "Benefits of horizontal cooperation in dial-a-ride services," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 97-119.
    17. Grahn-Voorneveld, Sofia, 2012. "Sharing costs in Swedish road ownership associations," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 645-651.
    18. Juan Aparicio & Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano, 2008. "Depreciation games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 205-218, February.
    19. Salant, David J, 2007. "Formulas for fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory royalty determination," MPRA Paper 8569, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Gansterer, Margaretha & Hartl, Richard F., 2018. "Collaborative vehicle routing: A survey," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(1), pages 1-12.

    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:unm:umagsb:2017024. 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: Andrea Willems or Leonne Portz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/meteonl.html .

    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.