Inventory dynamics and the bullwhip effect : studies in supply chain performance Citation for published version (APA): Udenio, M. (2014). Inventory dynamics and the bullwhip effect : studies in supply chain performance. Technische Universiteit Eindhoven. https://doi.org/10.6100/IR776508 DOI: 10.6100/IR776508 Document status and date: Published: 01/01/2014 Document Version: Publisher’s PDF, also known as Version of Record (includes final page, issue and volume numbers) Please check the document version of this publication: • A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal. If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license above, please follow below link for the End User Agreement: www.tue.nl/taverne Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at: [email protected] providing details and we will investigate your claim. Download date: 07. Oct. 2021 Inventory Dynamics and the Bullwhip Effect Studies in Supply Chain Performance Maximiliano Udenio Printed by Proefschriftmaken.nl jj Uitgeverij BOXPress Cover design by Victor Anelli This thesis is number D184 of the thesis series of the Beta Research School for Operations Management and Logistics. The Beta Research School is a joint effort of the School of Industrial Engineering and the Department of Mathematics and Computer Science at Eindhoven University of Technology, and the Center for Production, Logistics and Operations Management at the University of Twente. A catalogue record is available from the Eindhoven University of Technology Library. ISBN: 978-90-386-3664-1 This research has been partially funded by the Dutch Institute for Advanced Logistics (DINALOG), within the context of the 4C4Chem project: Cross-Chain Collaboration in the Chemical Industry. Inventory Dynamics and the Bullwhip Effect Studies in Supply Chain Performance PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, op gezag van de rector magnificus prof.dr.ir. C.J. van Duijn, voor een commissie aangewezen door het College voor Promoties, in het openbaar te verdedigen op donderdag 25 september 2014 om 16:00 uur door Maximiliano Udenio Castro geboren te Buenos Aires, Argentinië Dit proefschrift is goedgekeurd door de promotoren en de samenstelling van de promotiecommissie is als volgt: voorzitter: prof.dr. J.W.M. Bertrand 1e promotor: prof.dr.ir. J.C. Fransoo 2e promotor: prof.dr. A.G. de Kok leden: dr.ir. N.P. Dellaert prof.dr. V. Gaur (Cornell University) prof.dr. K. Hoberg (Kühne Logistics University) prof.dr.ir P.M.J. Van den Hof “I love deadlines. I like the swooshing sound they make as they fly by.” Douglas Adams Acknowledgments I had a lot of deadlines these past four years. Some of them were self imposed, some of them were not. Some were super-important, some not so much. But through it all, always in my head was this big one. The deadline. The finish your dissertation deadline. I stressed about this deadline quite a bit, especially during the first year of my Ph.D. How the hell am I going to produce enough original research? Worse, how am I going to write all that down? Well, at some point I just stopped worrying about the big picture, and concentrated in going step-by-step; deadline-by-deadline. In hindsight, it’s a great strategy for completing a long project like this, and I would love to say it was all part of a plan. However, I did it mainly because I could not afford to worry about the dissertation on top of everything else—it would’ve driven me mad. The dissertation itself never, ever, left the back of my mind, but I sort of learned to live with that feeling—some sort of survival instinct, I guess. But It works, and by, say, the middle of year 4 I ‘suddenly’ realized that I had, somehow, accumulated quite a lot of work. Not only that, but when taken together, it started to look like a dissertation. There was a thesis behind it, and the only thing left for me to do was to discover it and shape it. And stress out over layout and fonts and whatnot. My point is that this dissertation is the result of 4 years of constant tinkering and ruminating on ideas; 4 years of long, short, planned, improvised, fulfilling, grueling discussions with lots of people; 4 years of writing down these ideas little by little—of course, the best ideas usually came in comically inconvenient times: In the shower, in dreams, biking in the middle of nowhere... everywhere, it seems, except while at my desk. This dissertation is not the result of me going into a deep cave with some blank paper, waiting for a flash of inspiration to take over me, only to emerge several months later with a bunch of finished books. What I’m trying to say that there’s no way I could’ve done this on my own. I owe profound gratitude to so many people. You’ve all been so patient and generous and understanding. Let me start with Jan. None of this would have happened without prof.dr.ir. Jan Fransoo. Not only because he is the one who actually hired me for this position, but because without his guidance I wouldn’t have made it past the first tiny step. Jan pushed me when I needed a push, held me back when I was about to go down some deep rabbit-hole, and always –always– asked the right questions. The kind of questions that help you turn confusion into research. He played a crucial role in every chapter of this dissertation. I lost count of the number times where I went to Jan with some ‘enormous’ problem, thinking all is lost, only to see him chuckle, think for 5 seconds and solve everything with some short and astute observation. On the flip side, but just as important, were all those times where I proudly went to Jan with some ‘genius’ idea, thinking I’m so clever, only to see him chuckle, think for 5 seconds and disintegrate my silly idea with some short and astute observation. Thank you Jan, for pushing me and for holding me back. Prof.dr. Ton de Kok is my second promotor. It’s always fun being around Ton. He shares his views on our field, and research in general, with such passion that it is invigorating. He made me think about what it all means, he helped me grasp the big picture; made me take a step back and look at everything I’ve learned as different parts of a whole. Thank you Ton for your ideas and suggestions. Professor Vishal Gaur, from the Johnson School of Business at Cornell University, hosted me for three months in beautiful Ithaca, New York. I worked together with Vishal in what is now Chapter 6. I cannot express how grateful I am for this opportunity; those three months were an insanely great experience. Vishal gave me so much of his time that I seriously couldn’t believe it. He guided me brilliantly, encouraging me all of the time. I hope that this collaboration is but a start. I also want to thank Vishal for accepting being part of my doctoral committee and helping improve my dissertation with his comments. The work contained in Chapter 4 is a collaboration with Eleni Vatamidou and dr. Nico Dellaert. Without Eleni, Theorem 4.1 would be conjecture 4.1. We worked long nights and weekends together, chasing after that elusive proof. Thanks Eleni for being awesome. For all the food and coffee; for your crusade against long, confusing sentences that only I understand. Nico helped to make this chapter be much better. His comments after reading that somewhat confusing first draft helped me find the focus it needed. I would also like to thank him for agreeing to be a part of my doctoral committee and for his comments on the rest of the work. I first met prof.dr. Kai Hoberg (from the Kühne Logistics University, Hamburg) not in person but by dissecting and analyzing his control theory papers—his influence in Chapter 4 is huge. We would later meet in real life and have the opportunity to work together. I want to thank Kai for being part of my committee. He brought his experience in both the fields of control theory and empirical research, which resulted in a stronger dissertation all around. I would also like to thank the final member of my doctoral committee, prof.dr.ir Paul van den Hof from the department of electrical engineering at the TU/e.