Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 322

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Who Should Finance the Supply Chain? Impact of Credit Ratings on Supply Chain Decisions

Kouvelis, Panos, Zhao, Wenhui·2018·Manufacturing & Service Operations Management

Abstract

Problem description: We study the impact of credit ratings on operational and financial decisions of a supply chain with a supplier and a retailer interacting via an early payment discount contract. The retailer has a single opportunity to order a product from the supplier to satisfy future uncertain demand. Both the retailer and supplier are capital constrained, and the retailer can use both short-term bank loans and trade credits for his financing needs, while the supplier can use short-term bank loans and/or the retailers early payment. We analyze for all relevant operational decisions (wholesale price, trade credit rates, bank loans, and order quantity) for capital-constrained firms. Academic/practical relevance: We add a framework on who should finance inventories, and at what rates, in the presence of differential credit ratings of the supply chain parties. Methodology: Within a modified selling to the newsvendor Stackelberg game with the supplier as the leader, we derive the equilibrium trade credit rates, wholesale price, bank loans, and order quantity. Results: We show there exists a threshold such that if the supplier’s credit rating is above it, then the supplier offers trade credits with zero interest rate and the retailer uses trade credits only. Otherwise, the supplier sets a positive rate, which motivates the retailer to combine trade credits and bank loans. The supplier always benefits from working with good rating retailers. A retailer prefers to work with suppliers outside the supplier’s credit rating hole (a finite set of ratings) over suppliers with ratings within the range. Managerial implications: We provide insights on who should finance supply chain inventories and at what rates when there are differential credit rating between the supplier and retailer. We provide a plausible explanation for the practice of large and good credit rating retailers maintaining a small cash ratio and working with small suppliers in developing countries. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2017.0669 . This paper has been accepted for the Manufacturing & Service Operations Management Special Issue on Interface of Finance, Operations, and Risk Management.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/msom.2017.0669

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 17 references

Metadata

Authors
Kouvelis, P., & Zhao, W.
Venue
Manufacturing & Service Operations Management
Published
2018-02
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
19-35
ISSN
  • 1523-4614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5498
OpenAlex
W2772931681
Cited by
322
References
17
FWCI
30.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Who Should Finance the Supply Chain? Impact of Credit Ratings on Supply Chain Decisions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/msom.2017.0669
The paper
Kouvelis, P., & Zhao, W. (2018). Who Should Finance the Supply Chain? Impact of Credit Ratings on Supply Chain Decisions. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2017.0669

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.