Shipping to Heterogeneous Customers with Competing Carriers

__Problem definition:__ We consider a shipper transporting and selling a short-life-cycle product to a destination market. Customers in the destination market obtain higher utility if they receive the product earlier but their time preferences are heterogeneous. Two transportation service providers (i.e., carriers) offer distinct speeds and competing freight rates. This study analyzes the shipper’s optimal shipping strategy under carrier competition. __Academic/Practical relevance:__ Perishable products are commonly shipped via multiple means of transport. The faster the mode of transport is, the more expensive it is, but speed enables the product to reach the market with higher quality. In addition to the trade-off between speed and cost, the competition between carriers can also influence the shipper’s transportation procurement strategies. Our model highlights the implications of carrier competition in a dual sourcing problem. __Methodology:__ We study a two-stage game-theoretical framework: Carriers first compete on freight rates, and then the shipper determines the shipping schedule. __Results:__ The shipper may benefit from product differentiation via dual-mode shipping, in which the shipment that arrives earlier is sold at a premium price. In equilibrium, the shipper’s profit can be U-shaped in the speed difference between carriers. Dual sourcing may be inferior to simply restricting a single shipping service in a winner-take-all fashion. __Managerial implications:__ This study reveals an underlying trade-off between the operational advantage from product differentiation and the cost advantage from carrier competition. To benefit from either of these advantages, a shipper should use two carriers with either very distinct or very similar speeds. Single sourcing may bring an additional cost advantage that outweighs the value of production differentiation through dual sourcing.

[1]  P. Labaste,et al.  Growing Mali's mango exports : linking farmers to markets through innovations in the value chain , 2010 .

[2]  Jan Fransoo,et al.  Switching Transport Modes to Meet Voluntary Carbon Emission Targets , 2014, Transp. Sci..

[3]  K. Moorthy Market Segmentation, Self-Selection, and Product Line Design , 1984 .

[4]  Christopher S. Tang,et al.  Fractional Price Matching Policies Arising from the Ocean Freight Service Industry , 2015 .

[5]  Yasuhito Tanaka,et al.  Profitability of price and quantity strategies in a duopoly with vertical product differentiation , 2001 .

[6]  Chung Yee Lee,et al.  The Impact of Slow Ocean Steaming on Delivery Reliability and Fuel Consumption , 2013 .

[7]  Volodymyr Babich,et al.  Using a Dual-Sourcing Option in the Presence of Asymmetric Information about Supplier Reliability: Competition vs. Diversification , 2011, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[8]  Andrew Lim,et al.  Transportation Procurement with Seasonally Varying Shipper Demand and Volume Guarantees , 2008, Oper. Res..

[9]  Fuqiang Zhang,et al.  Procuring Fast Delivery: Sole Sourcing with Information Asymmetry , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[10]  K Kristina Sharypova,et al.  Coordination and Analysis of Barge Container Hinterland Networks , 2012 .

[11]  M. Bagnoli,et al.  Log-concave probability and its applications , 2004 .

[12]  Stephen P. Boyd,et al.  Convex Optimization , 2004, Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook.

[13]  José Luis Egío García,et al.  A study of the mango market in the European Union , 2012 .

[15]  Kannan Srinivasan,et al.  Special Issue on Design and Development: Product Differentiation and Commonality in Design: Balancing Revenue and Cost Drivers , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[16]  Albert Y. Ha,et al.  Price and Delivery Logistics Competition in a Supply Chain , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[17]  Yimin Wang,et al.  Coproduct technologies: product line design and process innovation , 2013, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[18]  Fernando Bernstein,et al.  Competition for Procurement Contracts with Service Guarantees , 2008, Oper. Res..

[19]  Ying‐ju Chen,et al.  Selling Co‐Products through a Distributor: The Impact on Product Line Design , 2018, Production and Operations Management.

[20]  Chung-Yee Lee,et al.  Processing Time Ambiguity and Port Competitiveness , 2017 .

[21]  Eduard Calvo,et al.  Sourcing Strategies and Supplier Incentives for Short-Life-Cycle Goods , 2016, Manag. Sci..

[22]  Dorothée Honhon,et al.  Assortment Planning for Vertically Differentiated Products , 2012 .

[23]  S. Rosen,et al.  Monopoly and product quality , 1978 .

[24]  Volodymyr Babich,et al.  Competition and Diversification Effects in Supply Chains with Supplier Default Risk , 2006, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[25]  Serguei Netessine,et al.  Product Line Design and Production Technology , 2007 .

[26]  T. Notteboom,et al.  The effect of high fuel costs on liner service configuration in container shipping , 2009 .

[27]  Fuqiang Zhang,et al.  Obtaining Fast Service in a Queueing System via Performance-Based Allocation of Demand , 2007, Manag. Sci..

[28]  X. Vives,et al.  Price and quantity competition in a differentiated duopoly , 1984 .

[29]  Mónica Correa-López,et al.  Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly with Upstream Suppliers , 2007 .

[30]  1 Freight transport as value adding activity : A case study of Norwegian fish transports , 2004 .