Skip to main content

Agents Playing the Beer Distribution Game: Solving the Dilemma Through the Drum-Buffer-Rope Methodology

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Engineering Systems and Networks

Abstract

The Beer Distribution Game (BDG) is a widely used experiential learning simulation game aimed at teaching the basic concepts around Supply Chain Management (SCM). The goal in this problem is to minimize inventory costs while avoiding stock-outs –hence the players face the dilemma between storage and shortage. Human players usually get confused giving rise to significant inefficiencies in the supply chain, such as the Bullwhip Effect. This research paper shows how artificial agents are capable of playing the BDG effectively. In order to solve the dilemma, we have integrated supply chain processes (i.e. a collaborative functioning) through the Drum-Buffer-Rope (DBR) methodology. This technique, from Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints (TOC), is based on bottleneck management. In comparison to traditional alternatives, results bring evidence of the great advantages induced in the BDG by the systems thinking. Both the agent-based approach and the BDG exercise have proved to be very effective in illustrating managers the underlying structure of supply chain phenomenon.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Note that, according to BDG assumptions, it is not possible to elevate the bottleneck. It is an external constraint, which is beyond the supply chain’s sphere of influence. Hence the bottleneck will not be broken, and the continuous improvement cycle is reduced to three steps.

  2. 2.

    Youngman (2009) elaborated an excellent guide that can be consulted to get more detail in the implementation process.

  3. 3.

    This replenishment method is based on a basic periodic review system for issuing orders depending on incoming demand and inventory position, aimed at bringing this position up to a defined level. See Chen et al. (2000) for more detail of this widely studied policy.

References

  • Chaharsooghi SK, Heydari J, Zegordi SH (2008) A reinforcement learning model for supply chain ordering management: an application to the beer game. Decis Support Syst 45:948–959

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen F, Drezner Z, Ryan JK, Simchi-Levi D (2000) Quantifying the bullwhip effect in a simple supply chain: the impact of forecasting, lead times and information. Manage Sci 46:436–443

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Costas J, Ponte B, De la Fuente D, Pino R, Puche J (2015) Applying Goldratt’s theory of constraints to reduce the bullwhip effect through agent-based modeling. Expert Syst App 42:2049–2060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox JF, Spencer MS (1998) The constraints management handbook. Lucie Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Dardenne A, Lamsweerde A, Fichas S (1993) Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci Comput Prog 20:3–50

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert N (2007) Agent-based models. Sage Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldratt EM (1990) Theory of constraints. North River Press, Croton-on-Hudson, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldratt EM, Cox J (1992) The goal—a process of ongoing improvement. North River Press, Croton on-Hudson, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin JS, Franklin SG (1994) The beer distribution game: using simulation to teach systems thinking. J Manage 13:7–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Jairman WE (1963) Problems in industrial dynamics. Mit Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaminsky P, Simchi-Levi D (1998) A new computerized beer game: a tool for teaching the value of integrated supply chain management. The Production and Operations Management Society, Miami

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimbrough SO, Wu DJ, Zhong F (2002) Computers play the beer game: can artificial agents manage supply chains? Decis Support Syst 33:323–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee H, Whang S (1999) Decentralized multi-echelon supply chains: incentives and information. Manage Sci 6:475–490

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lee H, Padmanabhan V, Whang S (1997) Information distortion in a supply chain: the bullwhip effect. Manage Sci 45:633–640

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Moyaux T, Chaib-draa B, D’Amours S (2004) An agent simulation model for the quebec forest supply chain. Lect Notes Comput Sci 3191:226–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponte B, De la Fuente D, Pino P, Rosillo R, Fernández I (2013) Supply chain management by means of simulation. Polibits 48:55–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponte B, Pino R, Fernández I, García N, Monterrey M (2014) Multiagent model for supply chain management. In: Managing complexity. Springer, London, pp 233–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Simatupang TM, Wright AC, Sridharan R (2004) Applying the theory of constraints to supply chain collaboration. Supply Chain Manag 9:57–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterman JD (1988) Deterministic chaos in models of human behaviour: Methodological issues and experimental results. Syst Dynam Rev 4:148–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterman JD (1989) Modeling managerial behaviour: misperceptions of feedback in a dynamic decision making experiment. Manage Sci 35:321–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strozzi F, Bosch J, Zaldívar JM (2007) Beer game order policy optimization under changing customer demand. Decis Support Syst 42:2153–2163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taguchi G, Chowdhury S, Taguchi S (2000) Robust engineering. Mc Graw-Hill, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wilensky U (1999) NetLogo. In: The center for connected learning and computer-based modeling. Available via http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/. Cited 2 Jan 2015

  • Wooldridge M (2000) Reasoning about rational agents. MIT Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wu HH, Chen CP, Tsai CH, Tsai TP (2010) A study of an enhanced simulation model for TOC supply chain replenishment system under capacity constraint. Expert Syst App 37:6435–6440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu HH, Lee AHI, Tsai TP (2014) A two-level replenishment frequency model for TOC supply chain replenishment systems under capacity constraint. Comput Ind Eng 72:152–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Youngman K (2009) A guide to implementing the theory of constraints (TOC). Available via http://www.dbrmfg.co.nz/. Cited 14 Feb 2015

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Borja Ponte .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Costas, J., Ponte, B., de la Fuente, D., Lozano, J., Parreño, J. (2017). Agents Playing the Beer Distribution Game: Solving the Dilemma Through the Drum-Buffer-Rope Methodology. In: Amorim, M., Ferreira, C., Vieira Junior, M., Prado, C. (eds) Engineering Systems and Networks. Lecture Notes in Management and Industrial Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45748-2_36

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45748-2_36

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-45746-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-45748-2

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics