The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Supply Chain Coordination with Revenue-Sharing Contracts: Strengths and Limitations
Open accessAbstract
Under a revenue-sharing contract, a retailer pays a supplier a wholesale price for each unit purchased, plus a percentage of the revenue the retailer generates. Such contracts have become more prevalent in the videocassette rental industry relative to the more conventional wholesale price contract. This paper studies revenue-sharing contracts in a general supply chain model with revenues determined by each retailer's purchase quantity and price. Demand can be deterministic or stochastic and revenue is generated either from rentals or outright sales. Our model includes the case of a supplier selling to a classical fixed-price newsvendor or a price-setting newsvendor. We demonstrate that revenue sharing coordinates a supply chain with a single retailer (i.e., the retailer chooses optimal price and quantity) and arbitrarily allocates the supply chain's profit. We compare revenue sharing to a number of other supply chain contracts (e.g., buy-back contracts, price-discount contracts, quantity-flexibility contracts, sales-rebate contracts, franchise contracts, and quantity discounts). We find that revenue sharing is equivalent to buybacks in the newsvendor case and equivalent to price discounts in the price-setting newsvendor case. Revenue sharing also coordinates a supply chain with retailers competing in quantities, e.g., Cournot competitors or competing newsvendors with fixed prices. Despite its numerous merits, we identify several limitations of revenue sharing to (at least partially) explain why it is not prevalent in all industries. In particular, we characterize cases in which revenue sharing provides only a small improvement over the administratively cheaper wholesale price contract. Additionally, revenue sharing does not coordinate a supply chain with demand that depends on costly retail effort. We develop a variation on revenue sharing for this setting.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Bapna, R., Barua, A., Mani, D., & Mehra, A. (2010) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1100.0328 · Cited by 147
Kumar, R., Singh, R. K., & Shankar, R. (2015) · IIMB Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.iimb.2015.03.001 · Cited by 141
Supply Chain Coordination under Uncertainty
(2011) · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-19257-9 · Cited by 95
Towards supply chain collaboration in B2B pricing: A critical literature review and research agenda
Formentini, M., & Romano, P. (2016) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/ijopm-03-2015-0124 · Cited by 44
Papaioannou, G., Mohammed, A.-M., Despoudi, S., Saridakis, G., & Papadopoulos, T. (2020) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102077 · Cited by 38
To Be or Not to Be? Big Data Business Investment Decision-Making in the Supply Chain
Xu, L., Gao, R., Xie, Y., & Du, P. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11082298 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Cachon, G. P., & Lariviere, M. A.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 30-44
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2157406401
- Cited by
- 2,469
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 156.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.