LISS 2012 pp 279-286 | Cite as

Pricing and Coordination Research for TPL Based on Different Logistics Service Level

Conference paper


In this paper, we consider a situation that different logistics service level can influence the market demand, TPL service and the pricing decision models are constructed by using game theory. The equilibrium prices, service levels under different systematic states of two TPL enterprises are given. And the conclusion of this paper shows that the strong ability of logistics service does not necessarily have a competitive advantage when under the separate decision, pricing equilibrium under joint decisions not only make both sides get more income, but is also advantageous to raise the level of service. The conclusion also shows that revenue sharing is a good coordination mechanism for logistics service union, and its revenue sharing percentage depends on the negotiation skills of both sides.


TPL Service level Service price Revenue sharing Game theory 



This study was supported by philosophy social science fund of Hunan province (2010YBA048), general project of the ministry of education on humanities and social science research (11YJC790084) and Research fund for the Doctoral Program of higher education (20110161120032).


  1. 1.
    Boyer KK, Hult GTM (2005) Extending the supply chain: integrating operations and marketing in the online grocery industry. J Oper Manag 23:642–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boyson S, Corisi T, Dresner M, Rahinovich E (1999) Managing effective third party logistics relationships: what does it take. J Bus Logist 20:73–100Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berglund, M (1997) Third-party logistics providers towards a conceptual strategic model. Tek Lic thesis no. 642Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lambert DM, Emmerlhainz MA, Gardner JT (1999) Building successful logistics partnerships. J Bus Logist 20:165–181Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ha AY, Li L, Ng SM (2003) Price and delivery logistics competition in a supply chain. Manage Sci 49(9):1139–1153Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Marco A, Mangano G (2011) Relationship between logistic service and maintenance costs of warehouses. Facilities 29:411–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Weijers S, Glöckner H-H, Pieters R (2012) Logistic service providers and sustainable physical distribution. Log Forum 8:157–165Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Qi Ershi, Jiang Hong, Huo Yanfang (2010) Pricing analysis of logistics service between TPL and port enterprises. J Tianjin Univ 43(9):385–389Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Xu Minghui, Yu Gang, Zhang Hanqin (2006) Game analysis on supply chain with providing service. J Manag Sci China 18–26Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wu Qing, Dan Bin (2008) TPL coordination contract based on logistics service level influencing the market demand. J Manag Sci China 64–74Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xie T, Li J (2008) Pricing game analysis for third-party logistics services. J Syst Eng 23:751–757Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen J, Zhou L, Shao X-F (2008) Capacity investment decision of service system with exterior flexible capacity cooperating. Syst Eng Theory Pract 28:59–64Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Economics and TradeHunan UniversityChangshaP.R. China

Personalised recommendations