Effect of Supply Chain Finance Solutions on Production Planning Under Yield and Lead Time Uncertainty

Year 2026, Volume: 15 Issue: 1 , 38 - 61 , 31.03.2026

Orkun Bayram

https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.1732808

https://izlik.org/JA28FL62NJ

Abstract

For capital constrained suppliers, use of supply chain finance requires consideration of interplay between production and finance decisions. We solve the optimal input procurement problem for a capital constrained make to order manufacturer subject to yield and lead time uncertainty and compare use of supply chain finance methods (Advance Payment Discount (APD), Bank Loan (BL), Reverse Factoring with initial bank loan (RF), and Buyer Backed Purchase Order Finance (BPOF)). Our model applies to manufacturing from raw material such as mechanical and electronics and service processes such as cold chain transportation with individual cooling units, e.g. for vaccine distribution. We model our problem via stochastic optimization with binomial production yield and discrete random lead time. We prove the convexity of the objective functions for APD, BL, and RF; and we show that the objective function for BPOF can be expressed as difference of two convex functions and employ Difference of Convex Functions programming to find the optimal production input amount. We see that, as frequently applied in practice, payment terms longer than 90 days may make the supplier give up on the order due to no expectation for any profit. Optimal profit is more sensitive than procurement amounts to the joint effect of interest rates and yield probability as well as fluctuations in lead time. For suppliers with higher yield rates BPOF brings the most advantage when interest rates are the same for all methods, and APD brings the most advantage when flexibility on interest rates it provides is employed for suppliers with lower yield rates. Methodologically, we develop an analytical make-to-order model under yield and lead time uncertainty and solve the resulting optimization problems using expected profit maximization, including DC programming for the BPOF scheme.

Keywords

Production Planning , Supply Chain Finance , Uncertain Yield , Uncertain Lead Time , Make to Order , Batch Production

Tedarik Zinciri Finansmanı Çözümlerinin Verim ve Teslimat Süresi Belirsizliği Altında Ürün Planlamasına Etkisi

https://izlik.org/JA28FL62NJ

Abstract

Sermaye kısıtı altında faaliyet gösteren tedarikçiler için tedarik zinciri finansmanının kullanımı, üretim ve finansman kararları arasındaki etkileşimin dikkate alınmasını gerektirmektedir. Bu çalışmada, verim (yield) ve teslim süresi belirsizliği altında, siparişe göre üretim yapan sermaye kısıtlı bir üretici için optimal girdi tedariki problemi çözülmekte ve farklı tedarik zinciri finansmanı yöntemlerinin kullanımı karşılaştırılmaktadır (Peşin Ödeme İskontosu – Advance Payment Discount (APD), Banka Kredisi – Bank Loan (BL), başlangıç banka kredisi içeren Ters Faktoring – Reverse Factoring (RF) ve Alıcı Destekli Satın Alma Emri Finansmanı – Buyer Backed Purchase Order Finance (BPOF)). Önerilen model; mekanik ve elektronik gibi hammaddeden üretim yapılan imalat süreçlerinin yanı sıra, örneğin aşı dağıtımı için bireysel soğutma ünitelerine sahip soğuk zincir taşımacılığı gibi hizmet süreçlerine de uygulanabilir niteliktedir. Problem, binom dağılımlı üretim verimi ve ayrık rassal teslim süresi varsayımları altında stokastik optimizasyon yoluyla modellenmiştir. APD, BL ve RF yöntemleri için amaç fonksiyonlarının konveks olduğu ispatlanmış; BPOF yöntemi için amaç fonksiyonunun iki konveks fonksiyonun farkı biçiminde ifade edilebildiği gösterilmiş ve optimal üretim girdisi miktarını belirlemek amacıyla Konveks Fonksiyonların Farkı (Difference of Convex Functions – DC) programlama yaklaşımı kullanılmıştır. Sonuçlar, uygulamada sıklıkla karşılaşıldığı üzere, 90 günden uzun ödeme vadelerinin tedarikçilerin herhangi bir kâr beklentisi kalmaması nedeniyle siparişten vazgeçmelerine yol açabileceğini göstermektedir. Optimal kârın, tedarik miktarlarına kıyasla, faiz oranları ile üretim verimi olasılığının ve teslim süresindeki dalgalanmaların ortak etkisine daha duyarlı olduğu görülmektedir. Daha yüksek verim oranlarına sahip tedarikçiler için, tüm yöntemlerde faiz oranlarının aynı olması durumunda BPOF en fazla avantajı sağlarken; daha düşük verim oranlarına sahip tedarikçiler açısından, sunduğu faiz oranı esnekliği kullanıldığında APD yöntemi en avantajlı seçenek olmaktadır. Çalışmada problem, binom verim ve ayrık rassal teslim süresi içeren bir stokastik optimizasyon modeli olarak formüle edilmiş ve her bir finansman yöntemi için optimal girdi miktarı, konvekslik sonuçları ve DC programlama kullanılarak elde edilmiştir.

Keywords

Üretim Planlama , Tedarik Zinciri Finansmanı , Belirsiz Verim , Belirsiz Teslim Süresi , Sipariş Üzerine Üretim , Parti Üretimi

References

• Barad, M., & Braha, D. (1996). Control limits for multistage manufacturing processes with binomial yield (Single and multiple production runs). The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 47 (1), 98112.
• BenZvi, T. , & GrosfeldNir, A. (2007). Serial production systems with random yield and rigid demand: A heuristic. Operations Research Letters, 35 (2), 235–244.
• Camerinelli, E., & Schizas, E. (2014). A study of the business case for supply chain finance. The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, Studie.
• Caniato, F., Moretto, A. & Rice, J. B. (August 06, 2020). A Financial Crisis Is Looming for Smaller Suppli ers. Harvard Business Review, 14.
• Cao, Y., Zhang, J. H., & Ma, X. Y. (2019). Optimal Financing and Production Decisions for a Supply Chain With BuyerBacked Purchase Order Financing Contract. IEEE Access, 7, 119384119392.
• Chakuu, S., Masi, D., & Godsell, J. (2019). Exploring the relationship between mechanisms, actors and instruments in supply chain finance: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Production Economics, 216, 3553.
• Choi, S., Jeon, S., Kim, J., & Park, K. (2019). A newsvendor analysis of a binomial yield production process. European Journal of Operational Research, 273(3), 983991.
• Clemens, J., & Inderfurth, K. (2015). Supply chain coordination by contracts under binomial production yield. Business Research, 8(2), 301332.
• Cobb, B. R. (2013). Mixture distributions for modelling demand during lead time. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 64(2), 217228.
• Cohen, M. A., & Lee, H. L. (1988). Strategic analysis of integrated productiondistribution systems: models and methods. Operations research, 36(2), 216228.
• Dettenbach, M. (2015). The value of supply chain visibility when yield is random. doctoral dissertation. Advisor: Ulrich W. Thonemann. University of Cologne, 1129.
• Ding, W., & Wan, G. (2020). Financing and coordinating the supply chain with a capital constrained supplier under yield uncertainty. International Journal of Production Economics, 107813, 112.
• Eppen, G. D., & Martin, R. K. (1988). Determining safety stock in the presence of stochastic lead time and demand. Management science, 34(11), 13801390.
• Fernandes, R., L. & Ellram. 2017. Unlocking the potential of supply chain working capital finance. Supply Chain Management Review, 5, 1319.
• Ganeshan, R., Tyworth, J. E., & Guo, Y. (1999). Dual sourced supply chains: the discount supplier option Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 35(1), 1123.
• GrosfeldNir, A., & Gerchak, Y. (2004). Multiple lotsizing in production to order with random yields: Review of recent advances. Annals of Operations Research, 126(1), 43–69.
• Gru¨ter, R., & Wuttke, D. A. (2017). Option matters: valuing reverse factoring. International journal of production research, 55(22), 66086623.
• Gupta, D., & Benjaafar, S. (2004). Make to order, make to stock, or delay prod uct differentiation? A common framework for modeling and analysis. IIE Transactions (Institute Of Industrial Engineers), 36 (6), 529–546. doi: 10.1080/ 07408170490438519.
• Hekimog˘lu, M., van der Laan, E., & Dekker, R. (2018). Markovmodulated analysis of a spare parts system with random lead times and disruption risks. European Journal of Operational Research, 269(3), 909922.
• https://www.statista.com/statistics/886815/averagecommercialloaninterestrateinturkey/, Last accession date: Feb 15, 2021.
• https://businessbanking.bankofireland.com/credit/businessloans/businessloan/featuresandbenefits/, Last ac cession date: Feb 15, 2021.
• Huang, B., Wu, A., & Chiang, D. (2018). Supporting small suppliers thorough buyerbacked purchase order financing. International Journal of Production Research, 56(18), 60666089.
• Ivanov, D., & Das, A. (2020). Coronavirus (COVID19/SARSCoV2) and supply chain resilience: A re search note. International Journal of Integrated Supply Management, 13(1), 90102.
• Iva˘nescu, V. C., Fransoo, J. C., & Bertrand, J. W. M. (2006). A hybrid policy for order acceptance in batch process industries. OR Spectrum, 28(2), 199222.
• Kang, Y., Albey, E., & Uzsoy, R. (2018). Rounding heuristics for multiple product dynamic lotsizing in the presence of queueing behavior. Computers & Operations Research, 100, 5465.
• Kleinman, Z. (Dec 8, 2020). How will we keep the Covid vaccine at a cold enough temperature? https://www.bbc.com/ne 54889084, Last accession date: Feb 15, 2021, 13.
• Kouvelis, P., & Xu, F. (2021). A supply chain theory of factoring and reverse factoring. Management science, 67(10), 60716088.
• Ledger Insights. (2020). Danish Export Credit Agency underwrites COVID19 supply chain finance. https://www.ledgerinsights.com/danishexportcreditagencyunderwritescovid19supplychainfinance/, Last accession date: Feb 15, 2021.
• Levi, R., Singhvi, S., & Zheng, Y. (2020). Economically motivated adulteration in farming supply chains. Management Science, 66(1), 209226.
• Lowe, J. J., Khademi, A., & Mason, S. J. (2016). Robust semiconductor production planning under yield uncertainty. In T. M. K. Roeder, P. I. Frazier, R. Szecht man, E. Zhou, T. Huschka, & S. E. Chick (Eds.), Proceedings of the winter simu lation conference (WSC) (pp. 2697–2708). Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Publishing. doi: 10.1109/WSC.2016.7822307.
• Maehara, T., Marumo, N., & Murota, K. (2018). Continuous relaxation for discrete DC programming. Mathematical Programming, 169(1), 199219.
• Michna, Z., Disney, S. M., & Nielsen, P. (2020). The impact of stochastic lead times on the bullwhip effect under correlated demand and moving average forecasts. Omega, 93, 102033.
• OuldLouly, M. A., & Dolgui, A. (2004). The MPS parameterization under lead time uncertainty. International Journal of Production Economics, 90(3), 369376.
• Henriksen, P. N. (2011). Pricing barrier options by a regime switching model. Quantitative Finance, 11(8), 12211231.
• Pentico, D. W. (1994). Multistage production systems with random yield: heuristics and optimality. International Journal of Production Research, 32 (10), 2455–2462.
• Pfohl, H. C., & Gomm, M. (2009). Supply chain finance: optimizing financial flows in supply chains. Logistics research, 1(34), 149161.
• Rabta, B., & Reiner, G. (2012). Batch sizes optimisation by means of queueing network decomposition and genetic algorithm. International journal of Production research, 50(10), 27202731.
• Schemeleva, K., Delorme, X., & Dolgui, A. (2018). Evaluation of solution approaches for a stochastic lotsizing and sequencing problem. International Journal of Production Economics, 199, 179192.
• Sharda, B., & Akiya, N. (2012). Selecting make to stock and postponement policies for different products in a chemical plant: A case study using discrete event simulation. International Journal of Production Economics, 136(1), 161171.
• Somsen, D., & Capelle, A. (2002). Introduction to production yield analysis—a new tool for improvement of raw material yield. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 13(4), 136145.
• Talay, I., & OzdemirAkyıldırım, O¨ . (2019). Optimal procurement and production planning for multiproduct multistage production under yield uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research, 275(2), 536551.
• Tanrisever, F., Cetinay, H., Reindorp, M., & Fransoo, J. C. (2015). Value of reverse factoring in multistage supply chains. Available at SSRN 2183991, 131.
• Turkcan, A., Akturk, M. S., & Storer, R. H. (2009). Predictive/reactive scheduling with controllable process ing times and earlinesstardiness penalties. Iie Transactions, 41(12), 10801095.
• van Donk, D. P. (2001). Make to stock or make to order: The decoupling point in the food processing industries. International Journal of Production Economics, 69 (3), 297–306
• Wang, Y. , & Gerchak, Y. (2000). Input control in a batch production system with lead times, due dates and random yields. European Journal of Operational Research, 126 (2), 371–385.
• Wilhelmsson, N., & Dahlberg, E. (2013). Lead time analysis and reduction at Alfa Laval DC Lund. Lund University.
• Wu, A. (2017). A supportive pricing model for suppliers with purchase order financing. International Journal of Production Research, 55(19), 56325646.
• Wu, Y., Wang, Y., Xu, X., & Chen, X. (2019). Collect payment early, late, or thorough a third party’s reverse factoring in a supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 218, 245259.
• Vliet, van der, K., Reindorp, M. J., & Fransoo, J. C. (2013). Maximising the value of supply chain finance. (BETA publicatie : working papers; Vol. 405). Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, 124.
• Yano, C. A., & Lee, H. L. (1995). Lot sizing with random yields: A review. Operations Research, 43(2), 311334.
• Yuan, X., Bi, G., Fei, Y., & Liu, L. (2020). Supply chain with random yield and financing. Omega, 102334. Yu¨ceer, U¨ . (2002). Discrete convexity: Convexity for functions defined on discrete spaces. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 119(3), 297–304.
• Zhao, L., & Huchzermeier, A. (2019). Managing supplier financial distress with advance payment discount and purchase order financing. Omega, 88, 7790.