Advertisement

A Model of an Integrated Analytics Decision Support System for Situational Proactive Control of Recovery Processes in Service-Modularized Supply Chain

  • Dmitry IvanovEmail author
  • Boris Sokolov
Chapter
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 276)

Abstract

In the supply chain (SC) recovery process, a disruptive event, planning of the recovery control policy and implementation of this policy are distributed in time and subject to SC structural and parametrical dynamics. In other words, environment, SC structure and its operational parameters may change in the period between the planning of the recovery control policy and its implementation. As such, situational proactive control with combined use of simulation-optimization and analytics is proposed in the paper to improve processes of transition between a disrupted and a restored SC state. Implementation of situational proactive control can reduce investments in robustness and increase resilience by obviating the time traps in transition process control problems. This chapter develops a model of a decision support system for situational proactive control of SC recovery processes based on a combination of optimization and analytics techniques. More specifically, three dynamic models are developed and integrated with each other, i.e. a model of SC material flow control, a model of SC recovery control and a model of SC recovery control adjustment. The given models are developed within a cyber-physical SC framework based on the service modularization approach.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was partially supported by the grant of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research project No. 18-07-01272 and State project No. 0073-2019-0004

References

  1. Behzadi, G., O’Sullivan, M. J., Olsen, T. L., Scrimgeour, F., & Zhang, A. (2017). Robust and resilient strategies for managing supply disruptions in an agribusiness supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 191, 207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. DHL (2018). Retrived February 4, 2018, from https://resilience360.com/.
  3. Dolgui, A., & Proth, J. M. (2010). Supply chain engineering: Useful methods and techniques. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dolgui, A., Ivanov, D., & Sokolov, B. (2018). Ripple effect in the supply chain: An analysis and recent literature. International Journal of Production Research, 56(1–2), 414–430.Google Scholar
  5. Dolgui, A., Ivanov, D., Sethi S., & Sokolov, B. (2019). Scheduling in production, supply chain and Industry 4.0 systems by optimal control: fundamentals, state-of-the-art, and applications. International Journal of Production Research, 57(2), 411–432.Google Scholar
  6. Dunke, F., Heckmann, I., Nickel, S., & Saldanha-da-Gama, F. (2018). Time traps in supply chains: I optimal still good enough? European Journal of Operational Research, 264, 813–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Giannakis, M., Doran, D., Mee, D., Papadopoulos T., & Dubey R. (2018). The design and delivery of modular legal services: Implications for supply chain strategy. International Journal of Production Research.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1449976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gupta, V., He, B., & Sethi, S. P. (2015). Contingent sourcing under supply disruption and competition. International Journal of Production Research, 53(10), 3006–3027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. He, J., Alavifard, F., Ivanov, D., & Jahani, H. (2018). A real-option approach to mitigate disruption risk in the supply chain. Omega. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2018.08.008.
  10. Ho, W., Zheng, T., Yildiz, H., & Talluri, S. (2015). Supply chain risk management: A literature review. International Journal of Production Research, 53(16), 5031–5069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ivanov, D., Dolgui, A., Sokolov, B. (2019). The impact of digital technology and Industry 4.0 on the ripple effect and supply chain risk analytics. International Journal of Production Research, 57(3), 829–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ivanov, D., & Sokolov, B. (2013). Dynamic coordinated scheduling in the supply chain under a process modernization. International Journal of Production Research, 51(9), 2680–2697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ivanov, D., Sokolov, B., & Pavlov, A. (2013). Dual problem formulation and its application to optimal re-design of an integrated production-distribution network with structure dynamics and ripple effect considerations. International Journal of Production Research, 51(18), 5386–5403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ivanov D., Sokolov B., & Dilou Raguinia, E.A. (2014a). Integrated dynamic scheduling of material flows and distributed information services in collaborative cyber-physical supply networks. International Journal of Systems Science: Services & Logistics, 1(1), 18–26.Google Scholar
  15. Ivanov D., Sokolov B., & Dolgui A. (2014b). The Ripple effect in supply chains: Trade-off ‘efficiency-flexibility-resilience’ in disruption management. International Journal of Production Research, 52(7), 2154–2172.Google Scholar
  16. Ivanov D., Sokolov, B., & Pavlov, A. (2014c). Optimal distribution (re)planning in a centralized multi-stage network under conditions of ripple effect and structure dynamics. European Journal of Operational Research, 237(2), 758–770.Google Scholar
  17. Ivanov, D., B. Sokolov, A. Pavlov, A. Dolgui, & D. Pavlov. (2016a). Disruption-driven supply chain (re)-planning and performance impact assessment with consideration of pro-active and recovery policies. Transportation Research: Part E, 90, 7–24.Google Scholar
  18. Ivanov, D., Sokolov, B., Dolgui, A., Werner, F., & Ivanova, M. (2016b). A dynamic model and an algorithm for short-term supply chain scheduling in the smart factory Industry 4.0. International Journal of Production Research, 54(2), 386–402.Google Scholar
  19. Ivanov, D., Dolgui A., & Sokolov B. (2016c). Robust dynamic schedule coordination control in the supply chain. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 94(1), 18–31.Google Scholar
  20. Ivanov D. (2017) Simulation-based ripple effect modelling in the supply chain. International Journal of Production Research, 55(7), 2083–2101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ivanov D., Tsipoulanidis A., & Schönberger J. (2017a). Global supply chain and services management (1st ed). Springer.Google Scholar
  22. Ivanov, D., Dolgui A., Sokolov B., & Ivanova M. (2017b). Literature review on disruption recovery in the supply chain. International Journal of Production Research, 55(20), 6158–6174.Google Scholar
  23. Ivanov D., Pavlov A., Pavlov D., & Sokolov B. (2017c). Minimization of disruption-related return flows in the supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 183, 503–513.Google Scholar
  24. Ivanov, D. (2018). Structural dynamics and resilience in supply chain risk management. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ivanov, D., Dolgui, A., & Sokolov, B. (2018a). Scheduling of recovery actions in the supply chain with resilience analysis considerations. International Journal of Production Research, 56(19), 6473–6490.Google Scholar
  26. Ivanov, D., Sethi S., Dolgui A., & Sokolov, B. (2018b). A survey on the control theory applications to operational systems, supply chain management and Industry 4.0. Annual Reviews in Control, 46, 134–147.Google Scholar
  27. Ivanov, D. (2019). Disruption tails and revival policies: A simulation analysis of supply chain design and production-ordering systems in the recovery and post-disruption periods. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 127, 558–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Li, T., Sethi, S., & Zhang, J. (2017). Mitigating supply uncertainty: The interplay between diversification and pricing. Production and Operations Management, 26(3), 369–388.Google Scholar
  29. Lee, E. B., & Markus, L. (1967). Foundations of optimal control theory. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  30. Macdonald, J. R., Zobel, C. W., Melnyk, S. A., & Griffis, S. E. (2018). Supply chain risk and resilience: Theory building through structured experiments and simulation. International Journal of Production Research.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2017.1421787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meyer, G. G., Buijs, P., Szirbik, N. B., & Wortmann, J. C. (Hans). (2014). Intelligent products for enhancing the utilization of tracking technology in transportation. International Journal of Services & Production Management, 34(4), 422–446.Google Scholar
  32. Panetto H., Iung B., Ivanov D., Weichhart G., Wang X. (2019). Challenges for the cyber-physical manufacturing enterprises of the future. Annual Reviews in Control. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arcontrol.2019.02.002.
  33. Pavlov, A., Ivanov, D., Dolgui, A., & Sokolov, B. (2018). Hybrid fuzzy-probabilistic approach to supply chain resilience assessment. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 65(2), 303–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pavlov, A., Ivanov, D., Pavlov, D., & Slinko, A. (2019). Optimization of network redundancy and contingency planning in sustainable and resilient supply chain resource management under conditions of structural dynamics. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03182-6.
  35. RM. (2018). Retrieved February 10, 2018, from https://www.riskmethods.net/en/software/overview.
  36. Sawik, T. (2017). A portfolio approach to supply chain disruption management. International Journal of Production Research, 55(7), 1970–1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Scheibe, K. P., & Blackhurst, J. (2018). Supply chain disruption propagation: A systemic risk and normal accident theory perspective. International Journal of Production Research, 56(1–2), 43–59.Google Scholar
  38. Schmitt, T. G., Kumar, S., Stecke, K. E., Glover, F. W., & Ehlen, M. A. (2017). Mitigating disruptions in a multi-echelon supply chain using adaptive ordering. Omega, 68, 185–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shao, X. F., & Dong, M. (2012). Supply disruption and reactive strategies in an assemble-to-order supply chain with time-sensitive demand. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 59(2), 201–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sheffi, Y. (2005). The resilient enterprise: Overcoming vulnerability for competitive advantage. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  41. Sheffi, Y. (2015). Preparing for disruptions through early detection. MIT Sloan Management Review, 57, 31.Google Scholar
  42. Sommerfeld, D., Teucke, M., & Freitag, M. (2018). Effects of sensor-based quality data in automotive supply chains–a simulation study. In: M. Freitag, H. Kotzab, J. Pannek (Eds.) Dynamics in logistics. LDIC 2018, Bremen 20–22, 2018 (pp. 289–297). Lecture Notes in Logistics. Springer, Cham.Google Scholar
  43. Theorin, A., Bengtsson, K., Provost, J., Lieder, M., Johnsson, C., Lundholm, T., & Lennartson, B. (2017). An event-driven manufacturing information system architecture for Industry 4.0. International Journal of Production Research, 55(5), 1297–1311.Google Scholar
  44. Tomlin, B. T. (2006). On the value of mitigation and contingency strategies for man–aging supply chain disruption risks. Management Science, 52(5), 639–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. UPS (2018). Retrieved February 11, 2018, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYoNd2nQqLg.
  46. Wilkinson G. (2018). Integrating artificial intelligence with simulation modeling. Retrieved February 11, 2018, from https://www.anylogic.com/blog/.
  47. Xia, Y., Yang, M. H., Golany, B., Gilbert, S. M., & Yu, G. (2004). Real-time disruption management in a two-stage production and inventory system. IIE Transactions, 36(2), 111–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yang, Y., et al. (2017). Mitigating supply chain disruptions through interconnected logistics services in the physical internet. International Journal of Production Research, 55(14), 3970–3983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yoon, J., Talluri, S., Yildiz, H., Ho, W. (2018). Models for supplier selection and risk mitigation: A holistic approach. International Journal of Production Research, 56(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zelbst, P. J., Green, K. W., Sower, V. E., & Reyes, P. M. (2012). Impact of RFID on manufacturing effectiveness and efficiency. International Journal of Services & Production Management, 32(3), 329–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Economics and Law, Department of Business and EconomicsBerlin School of Economics and LawBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Saint Petersburg Institute for Informatics and Automation of the RAS (SPIIRAS)St. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations