Daniel Kern provides an answer on how to implement the theoretical concepts into day-to-day business of multinational corporations through the empirical validation of SCM models and in-depth casestudies. The four essays cover research on inter-firm collaboration, supply risk management, purchasing competences and research on measuring and benchmarking SCM efforts.
Micha Hirschinger emphasizes the importance of foresight on logistics and institutions in particular for effective decision making as distinct research in this context is limited. He applies a systematic and transferable multi-method approach based on Delphi studies and fuzzy c-means cluster analysis to develop profound scenarios for the future. He uses the relevance of information-processing requirements to investigate whether centralization of purchasing organizations increases functional efficiency. The author finally shows how a sharing-economy business model transfer could help to overcome the limited access to factor markets, especially trucks, at the base of the pyramid.
"This dissertation consists of three essays addressing companies' capacity investment and contracting issues. In Chapter 2, we investigate competing firms' demand and sales dynamics in the presence of a supply constraint and brand-level word-of-mouth. The demand dynamics exhibits Bass-type diffusion with positive word-of-mouth only being spread by satisfied adopters. The competition is through market penetration effect. Closed-form expressions are derived for the resulting demand and sales trajectories over a new product's life-cycle. We then present sample applications of our model in analyzing market share, solving capacity investment problems and modeling the threat of a potential entrant. A minor revision of our model leads to a new framework for studying the impact of a potential entrant and the cost of creating a barrier to entry. In Chapter 3, we study wholesale price contracts between a single supplier and a single buyer in the presence of a spot market. The supplier has influence on the spot price. To maximize the expected total profit given the randomness of future spot market conditions, the supplier decides on the contract price and the spot market output quantity. To minimize the expected total procurement cost, the buyer commits to a contract purchase quantity before her downstream demand is known, and buys extra supplies on the spot market in case of shortage. We investigate the problem in game-theoretic models with the supplier as the leader. The supplier may or may not announce the spot market output quantity at the beginning, which changes the buyer's outlook on future spot prices and her response to the contract. We find that when the supplier makes the announcement, compared to when he does not and decides on the spot market output quantity after a contract is signed, he sells less on the spot market and charges a higher contract price. Facing the higher contract price, counter-intuitively, the buyer commits to a larger contract purchase quantity fearing a higher future spot price. Although losing some profit on the spot market, the supplier makes extra gains in contract sales and enjoys a higher total profit, while the buyer expects to pay more in total procurement costs. Numerical studies show that the supplier's spot market power results in lower total output and loss in channel profit. In Chapter 4, we introduce and study Expected Transfer Payments (ETP), which is a function of the buyer's contract purchase quantity and the supplier's spot market output quantity. We search for ETPs that coordinate the supply chain in the presence of the supplier's spot market power. We find two sets of ETPs that coordinate the supply chain. Numerical examples show that those coordinating ETPs not only increase the supplier's expected profit and decrease the buyer's expected procurement cost, but also increase the supplier's total output. In a discussion on pre-commitment, we show that pre-commitment potentially has positive influence on the supply chain performance and that it is not necessarily advantageous for the supplier to pre-commit"--Leaves v-vi.
