Markets of Logistics Services: The Role of Actors’ Behavior to Enhance Performance

  • Nicola Bellantuono
  • Gregory E. Kersten
  • Pierpaolo Pontrandolfo
Chapter

Abstract

In real markets of logistics services, actors make independent decisions to pursue their own objectives, neglecting the need for maximizing performance of the market as a whole. The aim of this chapter is to assess the inefficiency of such logistics markets and define policies to improve system-wide performance, taking into account each actor’s behavior. A simulation model of a logistics marketplace is thus defined, wherein the transportation needs of a number of shippers have to be matched with the capacities of several carriers. The model is used to assess the players’ behavior and system performance in a decentralized logistics market. The analysis shows the extent to which certain features of the market affect inefficiency, stressing the room for improvement. Based on simulation results, several recommendations are given, aimed at influencing the actors’ autonomous decision making. We discuss how the recommendations’ efficacy is impacted by behavioral issues.

Keywords

Transportation Assure Expense 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work has been supported by Regione Puglia (APQ PS025) and the Engineering Faculty in Taranto of the Politecnico di Bari.

References

  1. S. Ağralı, B. Tan, F. Karaesmen, Modeling and analysis of an auction-based logistics market. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 191, 272–294 (2008)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. D. Andersson, A. Norrman, Procurement of logistics services—a minutes work or a multi-year project. Eur. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 8, 3–14 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. B.K. Bahinipati, A. Kanda, S.G. Deshmukh, Coordinated supply management: review, insights, and limitations. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 12(6), 407–422 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. J.R. Brown, C.S. Dev, D.J. Lee, Managing marketing channel opportunism: The efficacy of alternative governance mechanisms. J. Mark. 64(2), 51–65 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. G.P. Cachon, P.H. Zipkin, Competitive and cooperative inventory policies in a two-stage supply chain. Manage. Sci. 45(7), 936–953 (1999)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. M.C. Cooper, D.M. Lambert, J.D. Pagh, Supply chain management: more than a new name for logistics. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 8(2), 1–14 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. C.J. Corbett, C.S. Tang, Designing supply contracts: contract type and information asymmetry, in Quantitative models for supply chain management, ed. by S. Tayur, R. Ganeshan, M. Magazine (Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, 1999), pp. 269–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. L.L. Cummings, P. Bromiley, The organizational trust inventory (OTI): development and validation, in Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research, ed. by R.M. Kramer, T. Tyler (Sage, Thousand Oaks, 1996), pp. 302–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. O. Ergun, G. Kuyzu, M. Salvelsbergh, Reducing truckload transportation costs through collaboration. Transportation Science 41(2), 206–221 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. J.A. Fitzsimmons, J. Noh, E. Thies, Purchasing business services. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 13(4–5), 370–380 (1998)Google Scholar
  11. M.T. Frohlich, R. Westbrook, Arcs of integration: an international study of supply chain strategies. J. Oper. Manag. 19, 185–210 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. I. Giannoccaro, R. Moramarco, P. Pontrandolfo, E-procurement of logistics services: the impact of the service attributes on the exchange mechanism. In: 20 th International Conference on Production Research, Shanghai, 2–6 August 2009Google Scholar
  13. J. Gorick, Running on empty? Logist. Transp. Focus 8(10), 25–26 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. H. Lee, S. Whang, Decentralized multi-echelon supply chains: incentives and information. Manage. Sci. 45(5), 633–639 (1999)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. G.N. Nyaga, J.M. Whipple, D.F. Lynch, Examining supply chain relationships: Do buyer and supplier perspectives on collaborative relationships differ? J. Oper. Manag. 28(2), 101–114 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. D.M. Rousseau, S.B. Sitkin, R.S. Burt, C. Camerer, Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23(7), 393–404 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. A. Rubinstein, Modeling bounded rationality (The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1998)Google Scholar
  18. T. Schoenherr, V.A. Mabert, The use of bundling in B2B online reverse auctions. J. Oper. Manag. 26(1), 81–95 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. H.E. Simon, Models of bounded rationality (The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1982)Google Scholar
  20. X. Su, Bounded rationality in newsvendor models. Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag. 10(4), 566–589 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. C.S. Tang, Perspectives in supply chain risk management. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 103(2), 451–488 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. A.A. Tsay, S. Nahmias, N. Agrawal, Modeling supply chain contracts: a review, in Quantitative models for supply chain management, ed. by S. Tayur, R. Ganeshan, M. Magazine (Kluwer Academic Publisher, Norwell, 1999), pp. 299–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. S.K. Vickery, J. Jayaram, C. Drodge, R. Calantone, The effects of an integrative supply chain strategy on customer service and financial performance: an analysis of direct versus indirect relationships. J. Oper. Manag. 21(5), 523–539 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. O.E. Williamson, The Economic Institutions of Capitalism (The Free Press, New York, 1985)Google Scholar
  25. J. Yao, Decision optimization analysis on supply chain resource integration in fourth party logistics. J. Manuf. Syst. 29(4), 121–129 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. A. Zaheer, B. McEvily, V. Perrone, Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organ. Sci. 9(2), 141–159 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. V.A. Zeithaml, A. Parasuraman, L.L. Berry, Problems and strategies in services marketing. J. Mark. 49(2), 33–46 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicola Bellantuono
    • 1
  • Gregory E. Kersten
    • 2
  • Pierpaolo Pontrandolfo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanics, Mathematics and ManagementPolytechnic University of BariBariItaly
  2. 2.InterNeg Research CentreConcordia UniversityQuebecCanada

Personalised recommendations