A Model of an Integrated Analytics Decision Support System for Situational Proactive Control of Recovery Processes in Service-Modularized Supply Chain
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.
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
- DHL (2018). Retrived February 4, 2018, from https://resilience360.com/.
- 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
- 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
- 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.
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Ivanov D., Tsipoulanidis A., & Schönberger J. (2017a). Global supply chain and services management (1st ed). Springer.Google Scholar
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Lee, E. B., & Markus, L. (1967). Foundations of optimal control theory. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- 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
- 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.
- 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.
- RM. (2018). Retrieved February 10, 2018, from https://www.riskmethods.net/en/software/overview.
- 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
- Sheffi, Y. (2005). The resilient enterprise: Overcoming vulnerability for competitive advantage. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Sheffi, Y. (2015). Preparing for disruptions through early detection. MIT Sloan Management Review, 57, 31.Google Scholar
- 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
- 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
- UPS (2018). Retrieved February 11, 2018, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYoNd2nQqLg.
- Wilkinson G. (2018). Integrating artificial intelligence with simulation modeling. Retrieved February 11, 2018, from https://www.anylogic.com/blog/.