Value of Postponement

  • Seungjin Whang
  • Hau Lee
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 10)


Postponement — delaying the point of product differentiation in a production process — has been found to be an effective strategy in face of increasing product variety. One value of postponement is flexibility. While the product is still in its generic form, the manufacturer can observe the latest demands for the different end-products and, at the postponement point, determine how much to customize the generic product for each end-product form. Hence, the value of postponement comes from the resolution of uncertainty of demands up to the postponement point. Another value of postponement is that the forecast accuracy for the demand of the final products in the distant future can also be improved. In this case, postponement enables the decision concerning the final customization of the end-products to be made at the time when the demand forecasts of the end-products are improved. We quantify both values of postponement in this paper, and discuss their relative magnitudes as product variety increases.


Supply Chain Forecast Error Allocation Decision Random Walk Model Demand Forecast 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anand, K. and H. Mendelson, “Postponement and Information in a Supply Chain,” Working Paper, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, January 1998.Google Scholar
  2. Working Paper, Graduate School of Business, standford University, Jauary 1998.Google Scholar
  3. Asanuma, B., “Coordination Between Production and Distribution in a Globalized Network of Firms: Assessing Flexibility Achieved in the Japanese Automobile Industry,” paper presented at the Conference on Japan in a Global Economy, Stockholm School of Economics, 1991.Google Scholar
  4. Bitran, G.R., E.A. Haas and H. Matsuo, “Production Planning of Style Goods with High Setup Costs and Forecast Revisions,” Operations Research, 34, 1986, 226–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Box, G.E.P. and G.M. Jenkins, Time Series Analysis Forecasting and Control, Holden-Day, San Francisco, 1976.Google Scholar
  6. Heath, D. and P. Jackson, “Modelling the Evolution of Demand Forecasts with Application to Safety Stock Analysis in Production/Distribution Systems,” December 1991, Technical Report No. 989, School of Operations Research and Industrial Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853.Google Scholar
  7. Eppen, G. and L. Schrage, “Centralized Ordering Policies in a Multi-Warehouse System with Lead Times and Random Demand,” in Multi-Level Production/Inventory Control Systems: Theory and Practice, edited by L.B. Schwarz, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1981, 51–67.Google Scholar
  8. Feitzinger, E. and H.L. Lee, “Mass Customization at Hewlett-Packard: the Power of Postponement,” Harvard Business Review, 75, 1, 1997, 116–12.Google Scholar
  9. Fisher, M. and A. Raman, “Reducing the Cost of Demand Uncertainty Through Accurate Response to Early Sales,” Operations Research, 44, 1, 1996, 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Graves, S.C., “A Single-Item Inventory Model for a Non-Stationary Demand Process,” Working Paper, MIT, 1997.Google Scholar
  11. Lee, H.L. and C.S. Tang, “Modeling the Costs and Benefits of Delayed Product Differentiation,” Management Science, 43, 1, 1996, 40–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lee, H.L., “Effective Inventory and Service Management Through Product and Process Redesign,” Operations Research, 44, 1, 1996, 151–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Seungjin Whang
    • 1
  • Hau Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.Stanford UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations