Winning supplier

Minimum/Maximum number of winning supplier requirements introduce integral counts (for those suppliers who have winning bids versus those who do not) and lead to a set-cover type of constraint that make winner determination NP-hard. 

Contrary to the commodity chemical business, the key to win in the specialty products market does not lie in squeezing out profits by means of economies of scale or process optimization. Rather, it lies in the ability for fast new product launches in order to capture the largest market share as soon as possible. Since superior product quality and performance is what really differentiates one specialty product from another, the product properties need to be adjusted as required by business needs. For example, the ability to manipulate functional chemicals in detergent products such as enzymes and zeolites, as well as backbone chemicals like surfactants, is often the key to success for both the detergent manufacturers and chemical suppliers [3], This trend has created an urgent need for an efficient and effective product and process development for these products. 

In addition, the SIRM approach seeks to develop new models to encourage a shift from selling products to supplying services, by this way modifying the supplier/user relationship and resulting in a win-win situation for the economy... 

The concept of Chemical Leasing can also be extended to other fields. An example can be seen in the improvement of energy use by an intensified co-operation of supplier and user. Again the result will be a win-win situation for both, environment and economic profits of supplier and user. 

Furthermore, if customers offer to change suppliers simply because of an offer of lower price, there is obviously little existing vendor loyalty. The seller must be equally discriminating about who to accept as a customer. Far better for a seller to have to work hard to win a customer s business and trust, because if some minor mishap occurs (as is inevitable at some time or other), the customer more likely will approach the vendor rather than the vendor s competitor to solve the problem. 

These three trends offer significant opportunities, especially for the large distributors which have sufficient resources to cover the geographical scope and skill requirements, and to create new win-win business relationships with suppliers and customers. 

The practical problems arise from the fact that briefings of this type are of questionable value to the alternative supplier. They demand a great deal of effort while offering, by their very nature, slim profit margins. Moreover the business gained by winning such a brief is usually short-lived because there is no natural limit to the customer s desire for lower costs. 

An eagerness for recognition and success is important as a motivating force, but it should not be too central a motivation lest the perfumer get distracted by a quest for facile successes or discouraged by frequent disappointments. Disappointments are inevitable because of the way major projects are handled Nearly always, several perfume suppliers are involved and, within each supplier firm, several perfumers, but in the end only one can win. The closer one comes to winning, the keener the disappointment if the perfume is not selected. The fact that the decision is usually based on undefinable, subjective considerations makes it harder yet to accept. 

It should always be on the lookout for win-win ideas which will generate additional value with suppliers and should try to include sticks as well as carrots in the framework. For example, organizations should aim to build in price adjustments for those suppliers who fail to deliver value. 

P3 moves a company in a direction of seeking new business opportunities that generate wealth for all. No longer are customer supplier relations a win-lose proposition, but they can be structured for true partnership. There will be direct gains from the reduction of operating waste and the extension of the useful life of equipment, but there will be indirect benefits from deeper supplier-customer relationships and the elimination of adversarial procurement practices. 

The goal of a process like this is not only to reduce the number of suppliers but also to build trusting relationships with suppliers and create a win-win sitiration for both organizations. 

The key decisions that supported this transportation auction include the description of the ending round, the training of suppliers as they put together bids, and the process of selection of winning carriers between rounds. 

This section describes processes for customer and supplier coordination at Rane Brake Linings (RBL), Deming Award-winning brake lining supplier in India ([44]). One of RBL s customers introduced a new two-wheeler disc pad in the Indian market. While RBL produced the product to specifications, the pads were found to stick during use by the end customer. The customer reported the problem to RBL on 14 April, 2004. The twowheeler manufacturer claimed that the parallelism of the installed pads was... 

But what if there were two suppliers, each competing to win the contract. Suppose the two suppliers have produaion costs of r, and s, with a> 2> s. Consider a system in which the suppliers first compete on wholesale price, and the buyer chooses the appropriate retail price and quantity. F the two suppliers participated in an auction, then the wholesale price charged to the buyer would be Si- This wholesale price is always smaller than the best that can... 

However, under a catalog auction, the retailer gets to adjust the purchase quantity in response to the wholesale prices obtained. Thus, the suppliers first compete on wholesale price, and the winning price is 2-... 

Note that the envelope described above suggests that once bids are obtained from all suppliers, each supplier has an incentive to react to change his bid to become active. As an example, if supplier 1 were to change his bid to offer an execution price of 10 per unit and a reservation price of 33.25 per unit, it would add a point (10,33.25) that would enable this supplier to become active, and thus receive a portion of the buyers capacity reservation. Thus, competition across the suppliers causes interaction among their bids due to their desire to win and thus impacts the buyer s price. 

To illustrate these points, let s take a closer look at a specific industry—consumer products—and the dynamics of its nnderly-ing value network. The consnmer value chain is composed of many companies. It stretches from the consumer through a network of retailers, mannfactnrers, and suppliers. Other industries—transportation, third-party logistics firms, freight forwarders, and marketing agencies—play snpporting roles. It is not linear. Instead, it is a network of hnndreds of companies. Each company within the chain operates multiple supply chains. The industry has worked hard to be collaborative however, today few interactions are truly collaborative. They lack alignment and a win-win value proposition that can sustain the test of time. 

Through the use of collaboration tools, the questions ofhowto create awin-win situation between suppliers, distributors, the supply chain members, and to what extent collaboration tools are used become a concern for supply chains. Littler, Lev-erick, Bmce (1995) questioned the suitability of supplier collaboration maybe his question needs to be further extended, and it should be worded as to what extent/level supply chain collaboration is considered to be beneficial ... 

G Consulting firm "[Company s] insight into the global consumer products complex from consumer to retailer to supplier, helps companies develop and implement winning strategies. The firm s thought leadership among retailers and consumer products companies has led to the transformation of entire industry sectors."... 

Identify a list of potential suppliers, starting with your current suppliers. The members of the category team should reach consensus on the basic ground rules for awarding the business (e.g., a national contract for all of the corporation s office supply purchases) and the criteria (e.g., prices, rebates, breadth of offering, delivery frequency and options, order entry system, etc.) to use to select the winning proposal. It is extremely important to reach consensus on these issues before sending out the RFP (request for proposal). 

In crafting the RFP, clearly state your assumptions about volumes of business to be awarded, service levels, etc. explain the selection process and criteria and outline how you intend to measure both your and the supplier s compliance with the terms of the contract. Point out the potential increase in business that winning the contract would mean. Send out the RFP and then make your preliminary decision based on your preestablished criteria and use your best negotiating skills to come up with a final choice. 

It is essential to have clearly written proposals to resolve problems that could arise during implementation. Prepare a Request for Proposals (RFP) that states what information is required. Otherwise, each supplier will submit totally different proposals, and it will be extremely difficult to compare them on an apples-to-apples basis. Invite proposals only from suppliers that have a real chance of winning your order. Ideally, this will be at least two, and no more than four. 

Davenport et al [32] have studied the use of reverse multi-unit auctions with volume discounts in a procurement setting. Winner determination formulations are provided in Section 3.2.2, where we also discuss the introduction of business rules as side constraints, which is an important consideration in practical electronic markets. A combinatorial auction is used for single units (lot) of multiple items, with all-or-nothing bids are allowed and nonlinear prices are used to feedback information. Volume discount auctions are also used, when multiple units of multiple items are being procured and for the restricted case of bids that are separable across items. Another consideration in procurement auctions is that the outcome should be such that the final prices should be profitable for both the buyer and the suppliers, i.e. a win-win outcome. The competitive equilibrium property can be used to operationalize this notion of achieving a win-win outcome [32]. 

---