Quantifying the Bullwhip Effect in a Simple Supply Chain: The Impact of Forecasting, Lead Times, and Information

References

• Baganha M., Cohen M. The stabilizing effect of inventory in supply chains. Oper. Res. (1995) . ForthcomingGoogle Scholar
• Chen F., Drezner Z., Ryan J., Simchi-Levi D.Quantifying the bullwhip effect: The impact of forecasting, lead times and information (1998) . Working Paper, Department of IE/MS Northwestern University, and School of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, Evanston, IL. Lafayette, INGoogle Scholar
• Hax A. C., Candea D.Production and Inventory Management (1984) (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Johnson M. E., Lee H. L., Davis T., Hall R. Expressions for item bill rates in periodic inventory systems. Naval Res. Logist. (1995) 42:39–56Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahn J. Inventories and the volatility of production. The Amer. Econom. Rev. (1987) 77:667–679Google Scholar
• Kaminsky P., Simchi-Levi D., Lee Hau, Ming Ng Shu. A new computerized beer game: A tool for teaching the value of integrated supply chain management. Global Supply Chain and Technology Management (1998) 216–225POMS Series in Technology and Operations ManagementGoogle Scholar
• Lee H., Padmanabhan P., Whang S. The bullwhip effect in supply chains. Sloan Management Rev. (1997a) 38:93–102Google Scholar
• Lee H. Information distortion in a supply chain: The bullwhip effect. Management Sci. (1997b) 43:546–558Link, Google Scholar
• Metters R.Quantifying the bullwhip effect in supply chains (1996) Proc. 1996 MSOM Conf.:264–269Google Scholar
• Porteus E. Stochastic Inventory Theory. Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science (1990) 2.:605–651Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ryan J. K.Analysis of inventory models with limited demand information (1997) (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL) . Ph.D. DissertationGoogle Scholar
• Sterman J. D. Modeling managerial behavior: Misperceptions of feedback in a dynamic decision making experiment. Management Sci. (1989) 35:321–339Link, Google Scholar