Supplier and Producer Profit Sharing Models Based on Inspection Sampling Policy

Chiuh-Cheng Chyu, I-Ping Huang

.

DOI: 10.4236/jssm.2010.34054                

Abstract

This research presents three profit sharing models of a key item in a two-echelon supply chain production. The first model maximizes the supplier’s profit while allowing the producer to take his own optimal inspection sampling policy. The second model is developed exclusively to the supplier’s advantage. The last model adopts a collaborative strategy that permits both parties to negotiate an inspection policy, and aims to maximize total profit. In this two-echelon supply chain, the supplier determines the item quality by selecting a quality level of process setup, as well as the cycle time to reset this quality level. There is a tradeoff between total setup cost and the resulting quality of the key items. The interrupted geometric distribution is used to describe the item manufacturing quality for various cycle time setups. Furthermore, it is assumed that the inspection will not be perfect. The supplier must bear the loss from its downstream producer’s type I inspection error, and the producer will in turn undertake the risk of selling flawed products to customers. The application of the proposed models is illustrated via an example with interrupted geometric distributions.

Keywords

Profit Sharing, Inspection Sampling Plans, Inspection Errors, Bayesian Approach, Interrupted Geometric Distributions

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	G. B. Wetherill and W. K. Chiu, “A Review of Acceptance Sampling Schemes with Emphasis on the Economic Aspect,” International Statistical Review, Vol. 43, No. 2, 1975, pp. 91-210.
[2]	S. Bisgaard, W. G. Hunter and L. Pallesen, “Economic Selection of Quality of Manufactured Product,” Technometrics, Vol. 26, No. 1, 1984, pp. 9-18.
[3]	D. Y. Golhar, “Determination of the Best Mean Contents for a Canning Problem,” Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 19, No. 2, 1987, pp. 82-84.
[4]	H. Moskowitz and K. Tang, “Bayesian Variables Acceptance-Sampling Plans: Quadratic Loss Function and Step- Loss Function,” Technometrics, Vol. 34, No. 3, 1992, pp. 340-347.
[5]	R. L. Fink and T. M. Margavio, “Economic Models for Single Sample Acceptance Sampling Plans, No Inspection, and 100 Percent Inspection,” Decision Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 4, 1994, pp. 625-653.
[6]	M. S. Aminzadeh, “Bayesian Economic Variable Acceptance-Sampling Plan Using Inverse Gaussian Model and Step-Loss Function,” Communication in Statistics – Theory and Methods, Vol. 32, No. 5, 2003, pp. 961-982.
[7]	M. K. Lee, S. H. Hong and E. A. Elsayed, “The Optimum Target Value under Single and Two-Stage Screenings,” Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 33, No. 4, 2001, pp. 506-514.
[8]	M. K. Lee and E. A. Elsayed, “Process Mean and Screening Limits for Filling Processes under Two-Stage Scr- eening Procedure,” European Journal of Operation Research, Vol. 138, No. 1, 2002, pp.118-126.
[9]	H. M. Hsu, T. S. Su, M. -C. Wu and L. -C. Huang, “Multiple Lot-Sizing Decisions with an Interrupted Geometric Yield and Variable Production Time,” Computers and Industrial Engineering, Vol. 57, No. 3, 2009, pp. 699- 706.
[10]	R. H. Yeh, W. T. Ho and S.T. Tseng, “Optimal Production Run Length for Products Sold with Warranty,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 120, No. 3, 2000, pp. 575-582.
[11]	M. Ben-Daya and M. Hariga, “Economic Lot Scheduling Problem with Imperfect Production Processes,” The Jour- nal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 51, No. 7, 2000, pp. 875-881.
[12]	I. Moon, B. C. Giri and K. Choi, “Economic Lot Scheduling Problem with Imperfect Production Processes and Setup Times,” The Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 53, No. 6, 2002, pp. 620-629.
[13]	C. H. Wang and S. H. Sheu, “Optimal Lot Sizing for Products Sold under Free-Repair Warranty,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 149, No. 1, 2003, pp. 131-141.
[14]	C. H. Wang, “The Impact of a Free-Repair Warranty Policy on EMQ Model for Imperfect Production Systems,” Computers & Operations Research, Vol. 31, No. 12, 2004, pp. 2021-2035.
[15]	S. Anily, “Single-Machine Lot-Sizing with Uniform Yields and Rigid Demands: Robustness of the Optimal Solution,” IIE Transactions, Vol. 27, No. 5, 1995, pp. 625-633.
[16]	D. W. Pentico, “An Evaluation and Proposed Modification of the Sepehri-Silver-New Heuristic for Multiple Lot Sizing under Variable Yield,” IIE Transactions, Vol. 20, No. 4, 1988, pp. 360-363.
[17]	S. Anily, A. Beja and A. Mendel, “Optimal Lot Sizes with Geometric Production Yield and Rigid Demand,” Operations Research, Vol. 50, No. 3, 2002, pp. 424-432.
[18]	A. X. Zhang and S. M. Guu, “The Multiple Lot Sizing Problem with Rigid Demand and Interrupted Geometric Yield,” IEE Transactions, Vol. 30, No. 1, 1998, pp. 427- 431.
[19]	S. M. Guu and A. X. Zhang, “The Finite Multiple Lot Sizing Problem with Interrupted Geometric Yield and Holding Costs,” European Journal of Operational Res- earch, Vol. 145, No. 3, 2003, pp. 635-644.