Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Supply chain efficiency: a simulation cum DEA approach

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The management of risks within the supply chain and external to it has become highly critical component of supply chain management. Inventory management is a vital tool to mitigate these risks. Lead times and review periods are important parameters in inventory management. The organizations focus on these parameters to enhance the system-wide supply chain performance in terms of services to customers. This paper aims at analyzing the efficiency of total supply chain in context of average fill rate performance. We analyze the efficiency of a hypothetical supply chain network structure which is subjected to time delays due to lead time and inventory review period changes. To understand the optimal relative efficiency among different values of average fill rate performance obtained through simulation, we used Data Envelopment Analysis approach (DEA). Taguchi experimental design procedure is used as a vehicle for conducting the simulation experiments and analyzing its outcome. The proposed integration of simulation with DEA framework provides practical implications to the decision maker as well as connotes to the real world situation where different enterprises compete for the frontier supply chain efficiency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sudit EF (1995) Productivity measurement in industrial operations. Eur J Oper Res 85:435–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Christopher M (1992) Logistics and supply chain management: strategies for reducing costs and improving services. Pitman, London

    Google Scholar 

  3. Fox MS, Barbyceanu M, Teigen R (2000) Agent-oriented supply chain management. Int J Flex Manuf Syst 12:165–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Wagner SM, Bode C (2006) An empirical investigation into supply chain vulnerability. J Purch Supply Manag 12:301–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Craighead CW, Blackhurst J, Rungtusanatham MJ, Handfield RB (2007) The severity of supply chain disruptions: design characteristics and mitigation capabilities. Decis Sci 38:131–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ellis SC, Henry RM, Shockley J (2010) Buyer perceptions of supply disruption risk: a behavioral view and empirical assessment. J Oper Manag 28:34–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Colicchia C, Dallari F, Melacini M (2011) A simulation-based framework to evaluate strategies for managing global inbound supply risk. Int J Logist Res Appl 14:371–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Supply chain vulnerability report (2002) http://www.som.cranfield.ac.uk/som/dinamic-content/research/lscm/downloads/Vulnerability_report.pdf

  9. Samvedi A, Jain V (2011) Studying the impact of various inventory policies on a supply chain with intermittent supply disruptions. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Winter Simulation Conference, 1641–1649

  10. Li X, Chen Y (2010) Impacts of supply disruptions and customer differentiation on a partial-backordering inventory system. Simul Model Pract Theory 18:547–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Snyder LV, Shen ZJM (2006) Supply and demand uncertainty in multi-echelon supply chains. Working paper, P.C. Rossin College of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Lehigh University

  12. Dev NK, Caprihan R, Swami S (2013) Strategic positioning of inventory review policies in alternative supply chain networks: an information-sharing paradigm perspective. Int J Logist Res Appl 16:14–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Riezebos J, Zhu SX (2010) Inventory control when lead time and review period change. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Manufacturing & Service Operations Management (MSOM2010), June 28–29, Haifa, Israel

  14. Wong WP, Wong KY (2007) Supply chain performance measurement system using DEA modeling. Ind Manag Data Syst 107:361–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sheffi Y, Rice JB (2005) A supply chain view of the resilient enterprise. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 47:41–48

    Google Scholar 

  16. Silver EA, Pyke DF, Peterson R (1998) Inventory management and production planning and scheduling. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. Zhu J (2000) Multi-factor performance measure model with an application to Fortune 500 companies. Eur J Oper Res 123:105–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tavana M, Mirzagoltabar H, Mirhedayatian SM, Saen RF, Azadi M (2013) A new network epsilon-based DEA model for supply chain performance evaluation. Comput Ind Eng 66:501–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Liao HC, Chen YK (2002) Optimizing multi-response problem in the Taguchi method by DEA based ranking method. Int J Qual Reliab Manag 19:825–837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Refaie AA, Al-Tahat MD (2011) Solving the multi-response problem in Taguchi method by benevolent formulation in DEA. J Intell Manuf 22:505–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Chopra S, Meindl P (2010) Supply chain management: strategy, planning and operation, 4th edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lu SN, Zhou KL (2004) The first book of supply chain management. Business-week Publishing, Taipei

    Google Scholar 

  23. Yang F, Wu D, Liang L, Bi G, Wu DD (2011) Supply chain DEA: production possibility set and performance evaluation model. Ann Oper Res 185:195–211

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Chen F (1999) Decentralized supply chains subject to information delays. Manag Sci 45:1076–1090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Cachon GP, Fisher M (2000) Supply chain inventory management and the value of shared information. Manag Sci 46:1032–1048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gavirneri S, Tayur SR (1999) Value of information sharing and comparison with delayed differentiation. In: Tayur S (ed) Quantitative models for supply chain management. Kluwer, Massachusetts, pp 441–466

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Sahin F, Robinson EP (2002) Flow coordination and information sharing in supply chains: review, implications, and directions for future research. Decis Sci 33:505–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Dev NK, Caprihan R, Swami S (2011) A case study on redesign of supply chain network of a manufacturing organization. J Adv Manag Res 8:195–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dev NK, Shankar R (2012) Design of fractal information coordination system in a supply chain network. Int J Serv Oper Manag 12:1–19

    Google Scholar 

  30. Beamon BM, Chen VCP (2001) Performance analysis of conjoined supply chains. Int J Prod Res 39:3195–3218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Christopher M, Lee H (2004) Mitigating supply chain risk through improved confidence. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 34:388–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Norrman A, Jansson U (2004) Ericsson’s proactive supply chain risk management approach after a serious sub-supplier accident. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 34:434–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Tang CS (2006) Perspectives in supply chain risk management. Int J Prod Econ 103:451–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Hendricks KB, Singhal VR (2005) An empirical analysis of the effect of supply chain disruptions on long-run stock price performance and equity risk of the firm. Prod Oper Manag 14:35–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Zsidisin GA, Panelli A, Upton R (2000) Purchasing organization involvement in risk assessments, contingency plans, and risk management: an exploratory study. Supply Chain Manag 5:187–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Gupta D (1996) The (Q, R) inventory system with an unreliable supplier. INFORM 34:59–76

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Song J, Zipkin P (1996) Inventory control with information about supply conditions. Manag Sci 42:1409–1419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lewis B (2005) Inventory control with risk of major supply chain disruptions. Dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology

  39. Parlar M, Wang Y, Gerchak Y (1995) A periodic review inventory model with markovian supply availability. Int J Prod Econ 42:131–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ozekici S, Parlar M (1999) Inventory models with unreliable suppliers in a random environment. Ann Oper Res 91:123–136

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  41. Mohebbi E (2003) Supply interruptions in a lost-sales inventory system with random lead time. Comput Oper Res 30:411–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Wang Y-C (2008) Evaluating flexibility on order quantity and delivery lead time for a supply chain system. Int J Syst Sci 39:1193–1202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lewis BM, Erera, AL, White CC (2005) An inventory control model with possible border disruptions. Working paper, Georgia Institute of Technology

  44. Chen Y, Li X (2009) The effect of customer segmentation on an inventory system in the presence of supply disruptions. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Winter Simulation Conference, 1610–1621

  45. Chang Y, Makatosoris H (2001) Supply chain modelling using simulation. Int J Simul 2:24–30

    Google Scholar 

  46. Longo F, Mirabelli G, Papoff E (2005) Modelling analysis and simulation of a supply chain devoted to support pharmaceutical business retail. In: the Proceedings of 18th International Conference on Production Research, Salerno, Italy

  47. Suwanruji P, Enns ST (2006) Evaluating the effects of capacity constraints and demand patterns on supply chain replenishment strategies. Int J Prod Res 44:4607–4629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Sensi GD, Longo F, Mirabelli G (2008) Inventory policies analysis under demand pattern and lead times constraints in a real supply chain. Int J Prod Res 46:6997–7016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Talluri S, Baker RC (2002) A multi-phase mathematical programming approach for effective supply chain design. Eur J Oper Res 141:544–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Narasimhan R, Talluri S, Mendez D (2001) Supplier evaluation and rationalization via data envelopment analysis: an empiric examination. J Supply Chain Manag 37:28–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Talluri S, Sarkis J (2002) A methodology for monitoring system performance. Int J Prod Res 40:1567–1582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ross AD, Droge C (2004) An analysis of operational efficiency in large-scale distribution systems. J Oper Manag 21:673–688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Liang LF, Yang WD, Zhu J (2006) DEA models for supply chain efficiency evaluation. Ann Oper Res 145:35–49

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  54. Dev NK, Shankar R, Debnath RM (2012) Impact of lead time and review period changes on supply chain efficiency: a simulation cum DEA approach. In: Proceedings of 16th Annual International conference of the Society of Operations Management, SOM 2012, IIT Delhi, New Delhi

  55. Olhager J, Persson F (2006) Simulating production and inventory control system: a learning approach to operational excellence. Prod Plan Control 17:113–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Simchi-Levi D, Kaminsky P, Simchi-Levy E (2007) Designing and managing the supply chain: concepts, strategies, and case studies. Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  57. Masuchun W, Davis S, Patterson JW (2004) Comparison of push and pull control strategies for supply network management in a make-to-stock environment. Int J Prod Res 42:4401–4419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Kelton WD, Sadowski RP, Sturrock DT (2004) Simulation with Arena. McGraw-Hill, Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  59. Phadke MS (1989) Quality engineering using robust design. Prentice Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey

  60. Banker RD, Charnes A, Cooper WW (1984) Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manag Sci 30:1078–1092

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dayalbagh Educational Institute, Dayalbagh, Agra, India

    Navin K. Dev

  2. Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India

    Ravi Shankar

  3. Indian Institute of Public Administration, New Delhi, India

    Roma M. Debnath

Authors
  1. Navin K. Dev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ravi Shankar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Roma M. Debnath
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Navin K. Dev.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 8 Projected data for inefficient DMUs
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dev, N.K., Shankar, R. & Debnath, R.M. Supply chain efficiency: a simulation cum DEA approach. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 72, 1537–1549 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-014-5779-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-014-5779-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation