This paper investigates a risk-averse firm's investment strategy in real-time event-monitoring technologies coupled with dynamic disruption response decisions. The firm does not know how long the disruption will last, and the event-monitoring solutions provide the firm with a quicker update regarding the length of the disruption. When the firm receives an update, it has the flexibility to revise its initial response action. We model a two-stage stochastic program to study this problem where risk aversion is modeled in the form of a Service-at-Risk constraint. Our paper makes four important contributions. First, it characterizes the optimal recourse strategies given an update and identifies the conditions when the firm benefits from the recourse. Second, we characterize the optimal investment and initial response strategies where we find that the investment behavior is non-monotone. Third, our paper shows an interesting impact of risk aversion on the investment decision such that the firm may benefit from investing in event monitoring at moderate degrees of risk aversion, but not necessarily at low or high degrees of risk aversion. Fourth, we find that a firm's benefit from event monitoring is more profound when the capacity of contingency response is moderately limited.
BlackhurstJCraigheadCWElkinsD, et al. (2005) An empirically derived agenda of critical research issues for managing supply-chain disruptions. International Journal of Production Research43(19): 4067–4081.
6.
BMJ (2020) Covid-19: ibuprofen should not be used for managing symptoms, say doctors and scientists. Last accessed: June 11, 2024. https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m1086.
7.
CachonGPFisherM (2000) Supply chain inventory management and the value of shared information. Management Science46(8): 1032–1048.
8.
ChopraSReinhardtGMohanU (2007) The importance of decoupling recurrent and disruption risks in a supply chain. Naval Research Logistics54(5): 544–555.
9.
ChopraSSodhiMS (2004) Managing risk to avoid supply-chain breakdown. MIT Sloan Management Review46(1): 53.
10.
CraigheadCWBlackhurstJRungtusanathamMJ, et al. (2007) The severity of supply chain disruptions: design characteristics and mitigation capabilities. Decision Sciences38(1): 131–156.
11.
DemirelSKapuscinskiRYuM (2018) Strategic behavior of suppliers in the face of production disruptions. Management Science64(2): 533–551.
12.
DongLTangSYTomlinB (2018) Production chain disruptions: inventory, preparedness, and insurance. Production and Operations Management27(7): 1251–1270.
13.
DongLTomlinB (2012) Managing disruption risk: the interplay between operations and insurance. Management Science58(10): 1898–1915.
14.
FedergruenAYangN (2008) Selecting a portfolio of suppliers under demand and supply risks. Operations Research56(4): 916–936.
15.
FedergruenAYangN (2011) Procurement strategies with unreliable suppliers. Operations Research59(4): 1033–1039.
16.
GavirneniSKapuscinskiRTayurS (1999) Value of information in capacitated supply chains. Management Science45(1): 16–24.
17.
GoelVGrossmannIE (2004) A stochastic programming approach to planning of offshore gas field developments under uncertainty in reserves. Computers & Chemical Engineering28(8): 1409–1429.
18.
GoelVGrossmannIE (2006) A class of stochastic programs with decision dependent uncertainty. Mathematical Programming108(2): 355–394.
19.
GuoSZhaoLXuX (2016) Impact of supply risks on procurement decisions. Annals of Operations Research241: 411–430.
20.
GürlerÜParlarM (1997) An inventory problem with two randomly available suppliers. Operations Research45(6): 904–918.
21.
HekimoluMHParkJKazazB (2024) Service at risk in delivery operations. Decision Sciences55(1): 33–56.
22.
HendricksKSinghalV (2003) The effect of supply chain glitches on shareholder wealth. Journal of Operations Management21(5): 501–522.
23.
JonsbråtenTWWetsRJWoodruffDL (1998) A class of stochastic programs with decision dependent random elements. Annals of Operations Research82: 83–106.
24.
KleindorferPRSaadGH (2005) Managing disruption risks in supply chains. Production and Operations Management14(1): 53–68.
25.
LappasNHGounarisCE (2018) Robust optimization for decision-making under endogenous uncertainty. Computers & Chemical Engineering111(4): 252–266.
26.
LeeHLSoKCTangCS (2000) The value of information sharing in a two-level supply chain. Management Science46(5): 626–643.
27.
LiYZobelCWRussellRS (2017) Value of supply disruption information and information accuracy. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management23(3): 191–201.
28.
MehrotraMSchmidtW (2021) The value of supply chain disruption duration information. Production and Operations Management30(9): 3015–3035.
29.
MilnerJMKouvelisP (2002) On the complementary value of accurate demand information and production and supplier flexibility. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management4(2): 99–113.
30.
ParlarMPerryD (1996) Inventory models of future supply uncertainty with single and multiple suppliers. Naval Research Logistics (NRL)43(2): 191–210.
31.
QiL (2013) A continuous-review inventory model with random disruptions at the primary supplier. European Journal of Operational Research225(1): 59–74.
SaghafianSVan OyenMP (2012) The value of flexible backup suppliers and disruption risk information: newsvendor analysis with recourse. IIE Transactions44(10): 834–867.
35.
SchmittAJ (2011) Strategies for customer service level protection under multi-echelon supply chain disruption risk. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological45(8): 1266–1283.
36.
SchwabKSala-I-MartínX (2016) The global competitiveness report 2013-2014: Full data edition. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
37.
SheffiY (2001) Supply chain management under the threat of international terrorism. The International Journal of Logistics Management12(2): 1–11.
38.
Simchi-LeviDSchmidtWWeiY (2014) From superstorms to factory fires: managing unpredictable supply chain disruptions. Harvard Business Review92(1-2): 96–101.
39.
Simchi-LeviDSchmidtWWeiY, et al. (2015) Identifying risks and mitigating disruptions in the automotive supply chain. Interfaces45(5): 375–390.
40.
SnyderLVAtanZPengP, et al. (2016) OR/MS models for supply chain disruptions: a review. IIE Transactions48(2): 89–109.
41.
SnyderLVScaparraMPDaskinMS, et al. (2006) Planning for disruptions in supply chain networks. INFORMS TutORials in Operations Research: 234–257.
42.
StaufferD (2003) Risk: the weak link in your supply chain. Harvard Management Update8(3): 3–5.
43.
SvenssonG (2000) A conceptual framework for the analysis of vulnerability in supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management30(9): 731–749.
44.
TangCTomlinB (2008) The power of flexibility for mitigating supply chain risks. International Journal of Production Economics116(1): 12–27.
45.
TangSYGurnaniHGuptaD (2014) Managing disruptions in decentralized supply chains with endogenous supply process reliability. Production and Operations Management23(7): 1198–1211.
46.
TomlinB (2006) On the value of mitigation and contingency strategies for managing supply chain disruption risks. Management Science52(5): 639–657.
47.
TomlinB (2009) Impact of supply learning when suppliers are unreliable. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management11(2): 192–209.
48.
TomlinBTWangY (2005) On the value of mix flexibility and dual sourcing in unreliable newsvendor networks. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management7(1): 37–57.
49.
VeeraraghavanSScheller-WolfA (2008) Now or later: a simple policy for effective dual sourcing in capacitated systems. Operations Research56(4): 850–864.
50.
WangYTomlinB (2009) To wait or not to wait: optimal ordering under lead time uncertainty and forecast updating. Naval Research Logistics56(8): 766–779.
51.
WeissHJRosenthalEC (1992) Optimal ordering policies when anticipating a disruption in supply or demand. European Journal of Operational Research59(3): 370–382.
52.
YanXLiuK (2009) An inventory system with two suppliers and default risk. Operations Research Letters37(5): 322–326.
53.
YangZAydinGBabichV, et al. (2012) Using a dual-sourcing option in the presence of asymmetric information about supplier reliability: competition vs. diversification. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management14(2): 202–217.
54.
YangZAydınGBabichV, et al. (2009) Supply disruptions, asymmetric information, and a backup production option. Management Science55(2): 192–209.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
