Advertisement

Planning Physical Distribution Operations with Dynamic Simulation

  • Donald J. Bowersox

Abstract

Considerable management attention has focused on system redesign and operational improvement in traditional physical distribution practices. Management’s primary concern in this area has been the increased complexity, cost, and importance of quality customer service in modern marketing. (1) This article reviews a dynamic simulation model, LREPS (Long-range Environmental Planning Simulator), which is capable of simulating the physical distribution system of a manufacturing firm engaged in national distribution of packaged goods. The model’s purpose is to assist management in physical distribution system design.

Keywords

Planning Horizon Customer Service Distribution Center Physical Distribution Service Capability 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Bowersox, Donald J., ‘Physical Distribution Development, Current Status, and Potential’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33, January, 1969, pp. 63–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stewart, Wendell M., ‘Physical Distribution: Key to Improved Volume and Profits’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 29, January, 1965, pp. 65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    For complete development of the total cost concept see: LeKashman, Raymond, and John F. Stolle, ‘The Total Cost Approach to Distribution’, Business Horizons, Vol. 44, Winter, 1965, pp. 33–46Google Scholar
  4. 3a.
    Flaks, Marvin, ‘Total Cost Approach to Physical Distribution’, Business Management, Vol. 24, August, 1963, pp. 55–61.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    Geisler, M. A., and W.A. Steger, ‘The Combination of Alternative Research Techniques in Logistics Systems Analysis’, in Groff, G.K., and J.F. Muth(eds.), Operations Management: Selected Readings, Richard D. Irwin, Inc., Homewood, 111., 1969, pp. 324–332.Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    Baumol, W.J., and P. Wolfe, ‘A Warehouse Location Problem’, Operations Research, Vol. 6, March-April, 1958, pp. 252–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 5a.
    Ballou, Ronald H., ‘Dynamic Warehouse Location Analysis’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. V, August, 1968, pp. 271–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 5b.
    Rowan, B.F., ‘Linear Programming: A Straight Line to Distribution Efficiency’, Handling and Shipping, Vol. 6, November, 1965, pp. 56–60Google Scholar
  9. 5c.
    Bowersox, Donald J., Food Distribution Center Location: Technique and Procedure, Bureau of Business and Economic Research, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1962.Google Scholar
  10. 6.
    For a representative sample, see: Shycon, Harvey N., and Richard B. Maffaei, ‘Simulation — Tool for Better Distribution’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 39, November-December, 1960, pp. 65–75Google Scholar
  11. 6a.
    Kuehn, Alfred A., and M.J. Hamburger, ‘A Heuristic Program for Locating Warehouses’, Management Science, Vol. 9, July, 1963, pp. 543–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 6b.
    Ballou, Ronald H., ‘Multi-Echelon Inventory Control for Interrelated and Vertically Integrated Firms’, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1965Google Scholar
  13. 6c.
    Forrester, J.W., Industrial Dynamics, The MIT Press, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., 1961.Google Scholar
  14. 7.
    Heskett, James L., ‘A Missing Link in Physical Distribution System Design’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30, October, 1966, pp. 37–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 8.
    Hausman, W., ‘Sequential Decision Problems: A Model to Exploit Existing Forecasters’, Management Science, Vol. 16, October, 1969, p. B-93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 9.
    Ballou,‘Simulation — Tool for Better Distribution’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 39, November-December, 1960, pp. 271Google Scholar
  17. 9a.
    Howard, R. A., ‘Dynamic Programming’, Management Science, Vol. 12, January, 1966, p. 317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 10.
    Forrester, same reference as note 6, p. 14.Google Scholar
  19. 11.
    Hadley, C., Nonlinear and Dynamic Programming, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1964Google Scholar
  20. 11a.
    Howard, R.A., ‘Dynamic Programming’, Management Science, Vol. 12, January, 1966, p. 317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 11b.
    Bellman, R. E., and S. E. Dreyfus, Applied Dynamic Programming, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1962.Google Scholar
  22. 11c.
    The notable exception in simulation is Forrester, Shycon, Harvey N., and Richard B. Maffaei, ‘Simulation — Tool for Better Distribution’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 39, November-December, 1960, pp. 65–75Google Scholar
  23. 12.
    For a complete report on the research project and references to related doctoral dissertations see: Bowersox, Donald J., et al., Dynamic Simulation of Physical Distribution Systems, Division of Research, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1972.Google Scholar
  24. 13.
    National ZIP Code Directory, Post Office Department, Washington, D.C., 1966.Google Scholar
  25. 14.
    Kuehn and Hamburger, same reference as note 6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© H.E. Stenfert Kroese B.V. 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • Donald J. Bowersox

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations