Inventory Management, Metrics, and Simulation.

MARTIN, BENJAMIN ROBERT. Inventory Management, Metrics, and Simulation. (Under the direction of Jeffrey A. Joines and Kristin A. Thoney-Barletta). Today’s competitive markets challenge companies and their supply chains to balance speed, flexibility, quality, and responsiveness with low cost. To address these challenges, the area of supply chain management has become vital to the success of a company as supply strategies are set. Performance measures are critical for the successful implementation and assessment of a supply chain strategy. As organizations implement Lean and other continuous improvement strategies to meet the needs of today’s marketplace, traditional financial measures and performance measurement frameworks fail to properly gauge the benefits. This paper presents an overview of the predominant performance measurement frameworks in the literature and a proposed framework for Lean supply chains. Metrics from the supply chain literature are categorized using the proposed framework. The preponderance of the paper discusses a supply chain inventory management problem in industry. Companies are faced with global competition and, in an effort to retain market share, are attempting to lower finished goods inventory while maintaining or increasing customer service levels. This paper discusses the application of a novel technique for integrating ideality with the system operator to a real world supply chain inventory management problem. The system operator and ideality are TRIZ tools that allow one to develop an understanding of a problem as well as lead to novel solution generation. Integrating the two tools may provide new insights into the problem at hand. Ideality and the system operator are briefly summarized along with the methodology for integrating the two tools. An inventory model was developed to address the problem. A simulation study using actual demand, finished goods inventory, and forecasts was conducted to evaluate the average inventory and fill rates of different proposed inventory policies. The best policy from the simulation study set inventory targets at the SKU level while taking into account forecast inaccuracies. A pilot implementation of this inventory policy was successful and the apparel company implemented the model. The model that was implemented ignored variability with regards to the lead-time. The lead-time variability inherent in the system was causing poor fill rates. Therefore, the inventory model was extended to incorporate lead-time variability. Using a simulation study, the new proposed inventory model was evaluated and compared to six inventory models from the literature. The inventory models are compared using cycle service, average fill rate, and average inventory. The study considers a range of demand and lead-time scenarios using both theoretical and actual data. The proposed inventory model is shown to perform comparable to models from the literature but is easier to understand by the apparel company’s senior management. Inventory Management, Metrics, and Simulation by Benjamin Robert Martin A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty of North Carolina State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Textile Technology Management Raleigh, North Carolina 2010

[1]  Mohamed Ben-Daya,et al.  Some stochastic inventory models with deterministic variable lead time , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[2]  Manoranjan Maiti,et al.  A multi-item mixture inventory model involving random lead time and demand with budget constraint and surprise function , 2009 .

[3]  Garland Chow,et al.  Logistics Performance: Definition and Measurement , 1994 .

[4]  S. Holmberg,et al.  Systems Thinking in Supply Chain Measurements , 2000 .

[5]  Peter C. Brewer,et al.  USING THE BALANCED SCORECARD TO MEASURE SUPPLY CHAIN PERFORMANCE. , 2000 .

[6]  J Wijngaard,et al.  Decision systems for inventory management and production planning: Rein Peterson and Edward A. Silver Wiley, New York, 1979, xiv + 799 pages, £12.75 , 1981 .

[7]  Graham K. Rand,et al.  Decision Systems for Inventory Management and Production Planning , 1979 .

[8]  Jafar Heydari,et al.  A study of lead time variation impact on supply chain performance , 2009 .

[9]  Hans-Jörg Bullinger,et al.  Analysing supply chain performance using a balanced measurement method , 2002 .

[10]  Felix T.S. Chan,et al.  Feasibility of performance measurement system for supply chain: a process‐based approach and measures , 2003 .

[11]  E. L. Nichols,et al.  Introduction to Supply Chain Management , 1998 .

[12]  Doris H. Kincade,et al.  US apparel manufacturers’ company characteristic differences based on SCM activities , 2003 .

[13]  L. Joseph Thomas,et al.  Consequences of Order Crossover Under Order-Up-To Inventory Policies , 2001, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[14]  Stefano Tonchia,et al.  Performance measurement systems - Models, characteristics and measures , 2001 .

[15]  Andy Neely,et al.  Performance measurement system design , 1995 .

[16]  G. Stewart Supply chain performance benchmarking study reveals keys to supply chain excellence , 1995 .

[17]  Chandrasekhar Das,et al.  Effect of Lead Time on Inventory: A Static Analysis , 1975 .

[18]  A. Gunasekaran,et al.  A framework for supply chain performance measurement , 2004 .

[19]  Umit Bititci,et al.  Integrated performance measurement systems: a development guide , 1997 .

[20]  Morris A. Cohen,et al.  The Stabilizing Effect of Inventory in Supply Chains , 1998, Oper. Res..

[21]  Andreas Otto,et al.  Does supply chain management really pay? Six perspectives to measure the performance of managing a supply chain , 2003, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[22]  T. Davis Effective supply chain management , 2020, Strategic Direction.

[23]  Liang-Yuh Ouyang,et al.  A periodic review inventory model involving variable lead time with a service level constraint , 2000, Int. J. Syst. Sci..

[24]  Abdul Raouf,et al.  Inventory Models Involving Lead Time as a Decision Variable , 1994 .

[25]  Ron Basu,et al.  New criteria of performance management , 2001 .

[26]  Benita M. Beamon,et al.  Measuring supply chain performance , 1999 .

[27]  Lawrence W. Robinson,et al.  Improved Base-Stock Approximations for Independent Stochastic Lead Times with Order Crossover , 2005, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[28]  R. V. Hoek,et al.  “Measuring the unmeasurable” ‐ measuring and improving performance in the supply chain , 1998 .

[29]  T.C.E. Cheng,et al.  Measures for evaluating supply chain performance in transport logistics , 2002 .

[30]  Paul D. Hutchison,et al.  Cash‐to‐cash: the new supply chain management metric , 2002 .

[31]  Carl G. Thor The Measures of Success: Creating a High Performing Organization , 1994 .

[32]  A. Gunasekaran,et al.  Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment , 2001 .

[33]  John B. Kidd,et al.  Toyota Production System , 1993 .

[34]  James S. Noble,et al.  The changing basis of performance measurement , 1996 .

[35]  Remko I. van Hoek,et al.  The contribution of performance measurement to the expansion of third party logistics alliances in the supply chain , 2001 .

[36]  Russell E. King,et al.  Retail performance measures for seasonal fashion , 2002 .

[37]  Jing-Sheng Song The Effect of Leadtime Uncertainty in a Simple Stochastic Inventory Model , 1994 .

[38]  M. Porter The Competitive Advantage Of Nations , 1990 .

[39]  Neil D. Burns,et al.  A framework for proactive performance measurement system introduction , 1997 .

[40]  Kelvin F. Cross,et al.  The “SMART” way to define and sustain success , 1988 .