A Model for R&D Investment, Operational Decision-Making and Cooperative Contracts of a Supply Chain in Complex Product Systems: Game Theoretic Approach

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Management and Industrial Engineering Department, Malek-Ashtar University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.

2 Ph.D, Industrial Engineering Department, Islamic Azad University, Tehran South Branch, Tehran, Iran.

10.48308/jimp.14.1.35

Abstract

Introduction: Despite the fact that many researches have been conducted regarding cooperation in the supply chain; But research shows that collaborations in chains with asymmetric power structures, which lead to investment in research and development, have received less attention. This article deals with the development of a model for the supply chain of a complex product, which, in addition to operational decisions to supply the product to the market, also makes decisions regarding investment in research and development. Answering these questions by considering the different power structure in the supply chain and paying attention to cost sharing and revenue sharing contracts is one of the goals of this article: (1) determining the balance point between the amount of investment in research and development, product price and production amount (2) Investigating the impact of research and development uncertainty, buyer fairness and customer sensitivity to product technology level on supply chain performance
Methods: The risk of uncertainty in the output of the research and development process and the demand function dependent on the level of product technology are considered in the model. The model is developed under the asymmetric structure of power in the chain by considering various cooperation contracts including research and development cost sharing, production cost sharing, and revenue sharing. Each of the scenarios of this problem is presented as a non-linear two-level programming model. The two-level mathematical model was created with the Nash bargaining game approach and the simulation method was used in its optimization.
Results and discussion: This research shows that the risk of uncertainty reduces the profit of the supply chain, but the provided cooperation contracts can improve the performance of the chain compared to the decentralized structure. It was also found that the revenue sharing contract can generate more profit for both the entire supply chain and the supplier. But from the point of view of the buyer and based on the bargaining power, when his bargaining power is relatively low, R&D cost sharing and production cost sharing contracts are more beneficial. Also, increasing the fairness of the buyer will improve the performance of the entire supply chain in the structures of revenue sharing and research and development cost sharing. It has also been shown that the market's sensitivity to the level of product technology improves the performance of the chain in the structure of production cost sharing contracts and research and development costs. But in the revenue sharing structure, all members of the chain may not benefit from the market's sensitivity to the level of product technology. In addition, the market's sensitivity to the price and the fairness of the buyer, respectively, always cause a decrease and an increase in the performance of the supply chain.
Conclusions: Due to the significant costs of research and development and production in complex products, paying attention to these costs in supply chain cooperation contracts and sharing them between the influential factors in the supply chain can lead to an increase in the performance of the supply chain. The bargaining power between the buyer and the seller in this type of chain can affect the type of contract. Considering the unknown nature of information for the supply chain parties, more models can be developed.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Banerjee, T., & Siebert, R. (2017). Dynamic impact of uncertainty on R&D cooperation formation and research performance: Evidence from the bio-pharmaceutical industry. Reserch Policy, 46(7), 1255–1271. DOI:https://doi. org/ 10. 1016/ j.respol.2017.05.009
  2. Bhaskaran, S. R., & Krishnan, V. (2009). Effort, revenue, and cost sharing mechanisms for collaborative new product development. Management Science, 55(7), 1152–1169. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1010
  3. Chen, X., Wang, X., & Zhou, M. (2019). Firms’ green R&D cooperation behaviour in a supply chain: Technological spillover, power and coordination. J. Prod. Econ., 218, 118–134. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.04.033
  4. Colson, B., Marcotte, P., & Savard, G. (2007). An overview of bilevel optimization. Annals of Operations Research, 153(1), 235–256. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-007-0176-2
  5. Duong & Chong, J. (2020). Supply chain collaboration in the presence of disruptions: a literature review. International Journal of Production Research, 58, 11, 3488–3507. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543. 2020. 1712491
  6. Guan, Z., Ye, T., & Yin, R. (2020). Channel coordination under Nash bargaining fairness concerns in differential games of goodwill accumulation. European Journal of Opereational Research, 285(3), 916–930. DOI:https://doi.org /10.1016/j.ejor.2020.02.028
  7. Leider, S., & Lovejoy, W. S. (2016). Bargaining in Supply Chains. Management Science, 1–20. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2273
  8. Li C., Zhou Y. W., Cao B., and Zhong Y. (2022). Equilibrium analysis and coalition stability in R&D cooperation with spillovers. IISE Transactions, 54(4), 348–362. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/24725854.2021.1947545
  9. Li, Q., Xiao, T., & Qiu, Y. (2018). Price and carbon emission reduction decisions and revenue-sharing contract considering fairness concerns. Journal of Cleaner Production, 190, 303–314. DOI:https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.032
  10. Liu, G., Wang, H., & Shao, X. (2022). Technology investments into a supplier with upstream entry. European Journal of Operational Research. 14(15). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2022.05.054
  11. Meng W., Ma M., Li Y., and Huang B. (2022). New energy vehicle R&D strategy with supplier capital constraints under China’s dual credit policy. Energy Policy, 168, DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113099
  12. Mu M., Li Q., Dai G., Li K., Zhang F., and Zhang. (2022). Government Subsidy Policy and Online Selling Strategy in a Platform Supply Chain with Green R&D and DDM Activities. Sustainability, 14(15), DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159658
  13. Nooraei Baydokht R., Hamedi M., and Asgharizadeh E. (2018). A Model for R&D Project Portfolio Selection and Development in LCSI Enterprises. The Journal of Industrial Managemane Perspective. 8(3). https://jimp.sbu.ac.ir/article_87164.html. (In persian).
  14. Noordhoek M., Dullaert W., Lai D. S W, and Leeuw S. D. (2018). A simulation – optimization approach for a service-constrained multi-echelon distribution network. Transportation Research, Part E 114, 292–311. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2018.02.006
  15. Roberta Pereira C., Christopher M., and Lago Da Silva A. (2014). Achieving supply chain resilience: the role of procurement. Supply Chain Management. 19, 626–642. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-09-2013-0346
  16. Pun, H. & Ghamat, S. (2016). The value of partnership under competition: When competitors may be R&D joint-venture and supply-chain partners for a critical component. International Journal of Production Economics, 177, 1–11. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.03.018
  17. Talbi, E. (2013). A Taxonomy of Metaheuristics for Bi-level. In Metaheuristics for Bi-level Optimization. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1–39. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37838-6
  18. Taleizadeh A. A. and Mohammadi R. (2015). Optimizing the Selling Price and Advertising Cost in a Two Layers Supply Chain Including a Manufacturer and Two Retailers. The Journal of Industrial Management Perspective. 5(2). https://jimp.sbu.ac.ir/article_87259.html. (In persian).
  19. Tekin, E., & Sabuncuoglu, I. (2004). Simulation optimization: A comprehensive review on theory and applications. IIE Transaction. (Institute Ind. Eng., 36(11), 1067–1081. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/07408170490500654
  20. Torabi S. A. and Tafakkori K. (2022). Designing an Applied Approach to Support Supplier Development Decisions in Buyer- Supplier Relationship Management. The Journal of Industrial Management Perspective, 12(46), 9–36. DOI:https://doi.org/10.52547/JIMP.12.2.9. (In persian).
  21. Wang, L., Xiao, T., & Lu, Q. (2018). The Role of Fairness in Cooperative Supply Chain. International Journal of Applied Mathematics, 48(3).
  22. Xie, L., Hou, P., & Han, H. (2021). Implications of government subsidy on the vaccine product R&D when the buyer is risk averse. Transportation Research Part E. 146, DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2020.102220
  23. Yan, F., Chen, H., & Zhang Z. (2022). Price and cooperation decisions in a cooperative R&D supply chain with different licensing models. Kybernetes. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/K-12-2021-1347
  24. Yao, D. Q., Yue, X., & Liu, J. (2008). Vertical cost information sharing in a supply chain with value-adding retailers. Omega, 36(5), 838–851. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2006.04.003
  25. Yenipazarli A. (2016). Managing new and remanufactured products to mitigate environmental damage under emissions regulation. European Journal of Operational Research, 249(1), 117–130. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.08.020
  26. Yu, X., Lan Y., & Zhao Y. (2021). Strategic green technology innovation in a two-stage alliance: Vertical collaboration or co-development? Omega (United Kingdom), 98, DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.omega.2019.102116
  27. Zheng, Y., Liu, S., Zhao, Y., Han, C., Zhou, Q., Wang, L., Colace, F., Alhalabi, W., & Alsharif, H. (2023). Game analysis on general purpose technology cooperative R&D with fairness concern from the technology chain
  28. Zhou, J., Zhu, J., & Wang, H. (2021). Dual-sourcing and technology cooperation strategies for developing competitive supplier in complex product systems. Computer & Industrial Engineering, 159(29),
  29. Zhu, K. & Weyant, J. P. (2003). Strategic Decisions of New Technology Adoption under Asymmetric Information: A Game-Theoretic Model. Decision Sciences, 34(4), 643–675. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5414.2003.02460.x

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics