Collaborate or not? A system dynamics study on disruption recovery

Quan Zhu*, Harold Krikke, Marjolein Caniels

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate different combinations of collaboration strategies to deal with different types of supply chain disruptions, find the best combination, and provide targeting suggestions for investments.

Design/methodology/approach - A system dynamics simulation is applied to study a supply chain with three tiers: a producer, a logistics service provider (LSP), and a retailer. There are three types of disruptions to simulate: a producer capacity disruption, an LSP capacity disruption, and a demand disruption. As each tier has the option to choose whether or not to collaborate with the other two tiers, eight (2 x 2 x 2) scenarios are generated to represent different combinations of collaboration strategies.

Findings - For a producer capacity disruption, both the producer and the LSP should collaborate by providing their surge capacities, while the retailer does not have to collaborate. For an LSP capacity disruption, the producer should not provide its surge capacity, while the LSP should do so; the retailer does not have to collaborate. For a demand disruption, both the producer and the LSP should not provide their surge capacities, while the retailer should not collaborate but play shortage gaming. Targeting suggestions for investments are provided.

Originality/value - Through system dynamics modeling, this study allows the discussion of surge capacity to help supply chain partners and the discussion of shortage gaming when products are oversupplied, in a disruption recovery system over time.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)271-290
Number of pages20
JournalIndustrial Management & Data Systems
Volume116
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Keywords

  • System dynamics
  • Collaboration
  • Supply chain disruptions
  • Disruption recovery
  • Shortage gaming
  • Surge capacity
  • SUPPLY CHAIN PERFORMANCE
  • RISK-MANAGEMENT
  • ENVIRONMENTAL UNCERTAINTY
  • BALANCED SCORECARD
  • MANAGING RISK
  • DEMAND
  • CAPACITY
  • BULLWHIP
  • IMPACT
  • POWER

Cite this

@article{d571fc4920f34f3aa8eb7d783f497f1b,
title = "Collaborate or not? A system dynamics study on disruption recovery",
abstract = "Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate different combinations of collaboration strategies to deal with different types of supply chain disruptions, find the best combination, and provide targeting suggestions for investments.Design/methodology/approach - A system dynamics simulation is applied to study a supply chain with three tiers: a producer, a logistics service provider (LSP), and a retailer. There are three types of disruptions to simulate: a producer capacity disruption, an LSP capacity disruption, and a demand disruption. As each tier has the option to choose whether or not to collaborate with the other two tiers, eight (2 x 2 x 2) scenarios are generated to represent different combinations of collaboration strategies.Findings - For a producer capacity disruption, both the producer and the LSP should collaborate by providing their surge capacities, while the retailer does not have to collaborate. For an LSP capacity disruption, the producer should not provide its surge capacity, while the LSP should do so; the retailer does not have to collaborate. For a demand disruption, both the producer and the LSP should not provide their surge capacities, while the retailer should not collaborate but play shortage gaming. Targeting suggestions for investments are provided.Originality/value - Through system dynamics modeling, this study allows the discussion of surge capacity to help supply chain partners and the discussion of shortage gaming when products are oversupplied, in a disruption recovery system over time.",
keywords = "System dynamics, Collaboration, Supply chain disruptions, Disruption recovery, Shortage gaming, Surge capacity, SUPPLY CHAIN PERFORMANCE, RISK-MANAGEMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL UNCERTAINTY, BALANCED SCORECARD, MANAGING RISK, DEMAND, CAPACITY, BULLWHIP, IMPACT, POWER",
author = "Quan Zhu and Harold Krikke and Marjolein Caniels",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1108/IMDS-05-2015-0209",
language = "English",
volume = "116",
pages = "271--290",
journal = "Industrial Management & Data Systems",
issn = "0263-5577",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Limited",
number = "2",

}

Collaborate or not? A system dynamics study on disruption recovery. / Zhu, Quan; Krikke, Harold; Caniels, Marjolein.

In: Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 116, No. 2, 2016, p. 271-290.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Collaborate or not? A system dynamics study on disruption recovery

AU - Zhu, Quan

AU - Krikke, Harold

AU - Caniels, Marjolein

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate different combinations of collaboration strategies to deal with different types of supply chain disruptions, find the best combination, and provide targeting suggestions for investments.Design/methodology/approach - A system dynamics simulation is applied to study a supply chain with three tiers: a producer, a logistics service provider (LSP), and a retailer. There are three types of disruptions to simulate: a producer capacity disruption, an LSP capacity disruption, and a demand disruption. As each tier has the option to choose whether or not to collaborate with the other two tiers, eight (2 x 2 x 2) scenarios are generated to represent different combinations of collaboration strategies.Findings - For a producer capacity disruption, both the producer and the LSP should collaborate by providing their surge capacities, while the retailer does not have to collaborate. For an LSP capacity disruption, the producer should not provide its surge capacity, while the LSP should do so; the retailer does not have to collaborate. For a demand disruption, both the producer and the LSP should not provide their surge capacities, while the retailer should not collaborate but play shortage gaming. Targeting suggestions for investments are provided.Originality/value - Through system dynamics modeling, this study allows the discussion of surge capacity to help supply chain partners and the discussion of shortage gaming when products are oversupplied, in a disruption recovery system over time.

AB - Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate different combinations of collaboration strategies to deal with different types of supply chain disruptions, find the best combination, and provide targeting suggestions for investments.Design/methodology/approach - A system dynamics simulation is applied to study a supply chain with three tiers: a producer, a logistics service provider (LSP), and a retailer. There are three types of disruptions to simulate: a producer capacity disruption, an LSP capacity disruption, and a demand disruption. As each tier has the option to choose whether or not to collaborate with the other two tiers, eight (2 x 2 x 2) scenarios are generated to represent different combinations of collaboration strategies.Findings - For a producer capacity disruption, both the producer and the LSP should collaborate by providing their surge capacities, while the retailer does not have to collaborate. For an LSP capacity disruption, the producer should not provide its surge capacity, while the LSP should do so; the retailer does not have to collaborate. For a demand disruption, both the producer and the LSP should not provide their surge capacities, while the retailer should not collaborate but play shortage gaming. Targeting suggestions for investments are provided.Originality/value - Through system dynamics modeling, this study allows the discussion of surge capacity to help supply chain partners and the discussion of shortage gaming when products are oversupplied, in a disruption recovery system over time.

KW - System dynamics

KW - Collaboration

KW - Supply chain disruptions

KW - Disruption recovery

KW - Shortage gaming

KW - Surge capacity

KW - SUPPLY CHAIN PERFORMANCE

KW - RISK-MANAGEMENT

KW - ENVIRONMENTAL UNCERTAINTY

KW - BALANCED SCORECARD

KW - MANAGING RISK

KW - DEMAND

KW - CAPACITY

KW - BULLWHIP

KW - IMPACT

KW - POWER

U2 - 10.1108/IMDS-05-2015-0209

DO - 10.1108/IMDS-05-2015-0209

M3 - Article

VL - 116

SP - 271

EP - 290

JO - Industrial Management & Data Systems

JF - Industrial Management & Data Systems

SN - 0263-5577

IS - 2

ER -