《供应链系统设计与管理》课程授课教案（讲义）Chapter 02（Lecture 5）Risk Pooling（Centralized system）

全英文课《DesigningandManagingSupplyChainSystem》授课教案Chapter2 (Lecture5)RiskPooling (Centralized system)OBJECTIVES(1) Learning the power of risk pooling(2) Grasping the trade-offs that we need to consider in comparing centralizeddistribution systems with decentralized distribution systemsTEACHINGCONTENT2.3RiskPoolingOne of the most powerful tools used to address variability in the supply chain isthe concept of risk pooling. Risk pooling suggests that demand variability is reducedif one aggregates demand across locations. This is true since, as we aggregate demandacross different locations, it becomes more likely that high demand from onecustomer will be offset by low demand from another. This reduction in variabilityallows a decrease in safety stock and therefore reduces average inventory.To understand risk pooling, it is essential to understand the concepts of standarddeviation and coefficient of variation of demand. Standard deviation is a measure ofhow much demand tends to vary around the average, and coefficient of variation isthe ratio of standard deviation to average demand:Standard deviationCoefficient ofvariationAverage demandIt is important at this point to understand the difference between the standarddeviation and the coefficient of variation, both of which provide a measure ofvariability of customer demand. Indeed, while the standard deviation measures theabsolute variability of customer demands, the coefficient of variation measuresvariability relative to average demand.With this background, to see the power of risk pooling, consider the followingcase:CASERiskPoolingACME, a company that produces and distributes electronic equipment in theNortheast of the United States,faces a distribution problem.The current distributionsystem partitions the Northeast into two markets, each of which has a singlewarehouse.OnewarehouseislocatedinParamus,NewJerseyandthesecondislocated in Newton, Massachusetts.Customers, typically retailers, receive itemsdirectly from the warehouses, in the current distribution system, each customer isassigned to a single market and receives deliveries from the corresponding warehouseThe warehouses receive items from a manufacturing facility in Chicago. Leadtime for delivery to each of the warehouses is about one week and the manufacturingfacility has sufficient production capacity to satisfy any warehouse order. The current

全英文课《Designing and Managing Supply Chain System》 授课教案 Chapter 2 (Lecture 5) Risk Pooling (Centralized system) OBJECTIVES (1) Learning the power of risk pooling (2) Grasping the trade-offs that we need to consider in comparing centralized distribution systems with decentralized distribution systems TEACHING CONTENT 2.3 Risk Pooling One of the most powerful tools used to address variability in the supply chain is the concept of risk pooling. Risk pooling suggests that demand variability is reduced if one aggregates demand across locations. This is true since, as we aggregate demand across different locations, it becomes more likely that high demand from one customer will be offset by low demand from another. This reduction in variability allows a decrease in safety stock and therefore reduces average inventory. To understand risk pooling, it is essential to understand the concepts of standard deviation and coefficient of variation of demand. Standard deviation is a measure of how much demand tends to vary around the average, and coefficient of variation is the ratio of standard deviation to average demand: It is important at this point to understand the difference between the standard deviation and the coefficient of variation, both of which provide a measure of variability of customer demand. Indeed, while the standard deviation measures the absolute variability of customer demands, the coefficient of variation measures variability relative to average demand. With this background, to see the power of risk pooling, consider the following case: CASE Risk Pooling ACME, a company that produces and distributes electronic equipment in the Northeast of the United States, faces a distribution problem. The current distribution system partitions the Northeast into two markets, each of which has a single warehouse. One warehouse is located in Paramus, New Jersey, and the second is located in Newton, Massachusetts. Customers, typically retailers, receive items directly from the warehouses; in the current distribution system, each customer is assigned to a single market and receives deliveries from the corresponding warehouse. The warehouses receive items from a manufacturing facility in Chicago. Lead time for delivery to each of the warehouses is about one week and the manufacturing facility has sufficient production capacity to satisfy any warehouse order. The current

全英文课《DesigningandManagingSupplyChainSystem》授课教案distribution strategy provides a 97 percent service level; that is, the inventory policyemployed by each warehouse is designed so that the probability of a stockout is 3percent. Of course, unfilled orders are lost to the competition and thus cannot besatisfiedbyfuturedeliveries.Since the original distribution system was designed over seven years ago, thecompany's newly appointed CEO has decided to review the current logistics anddistribution system. ACME handles about 1,500 different products in its supply chainand serves about 10,o00 accounts in the Northeast. ACME is considering thefollowing alternative strategy: Replace the two warehouses with a single warehouselocated between Paramus and Newton that will serve all customer orders.We willrefertothisproposed system asthecentralizeddistribution system.TheCEOinsiststhatthesame servicelevel,97percent,bemaintained regardlessofthelogisticsstrategy employed.TABLE2-5HISTORICALDATAFORPRODUCTAWeek24383幼R480858881856888-Mossnchusetts1815roae38Obviously, the current distribution system with two warehouses has an importantadvantage over the single warehouse system because each warehouse is close to aparticular subset of customers, decreasing delivery time. However, the proposedchange also has an important advantage; it allows ACME to achieve either the sameservicelevelof97percentwithmuchlowerinventoryorahigherservicelevelwiththe same amount of total inventory.Intuitively this is explained as follows. With random demand, it is very likelythatahigher-than averagedemandatoneretailerwillbeoffsetbyalower-than-average demand at another. As the number of retailers served by awarehouse goes up, this likelihood also goes up. Indeed, this is precisely the thirdprinciple of all forecasts described at the beginning of Section 2.2.2: aggregateforecasts aremore accurate.How much can ACME reduce inventory if the company decides to switch to thecentralized system but maintain the same 97 percent service level?To answer that question, we need to perform a more rigorous analysis of theinventory policy that ACME should use in both the current system and the centralizedsystem. We will explain this analysis for two specific products, Product A and ProductB,althoughthe analysis mustbe conducted forallproducts.For both products, an order from the factory costs $60 per order and holdinginventory costs are so.27 per unit per week. In the current distribution system, thecost of transporting a product from a warehouse to a customer is, on average, $1.05per product. It is estimated that in the centralized distribution system, thetransportation costfromthecentral warehousewillbe,onaverage,$1.10 perproduct.For this analysis, we assume that delivery lead time is not significantly different in thetwo systems.Tables 2-5 and 2-6 provide historical data for Products A and B, respectively. Thetables include weekly demand information for each product for the last eight weeks in

全英文课《Designing and Managing Supply Chain System》 授课教案 distribution strategy provides a 97 percent service level; that is, the inventory policy employed by each warehouse is designed so that the probability of a stockout is 3 percent. Of course, unfilled orders are lost to the competition and thus cannot be satisfied by future deliveries. Since the original distribution system was designed over seven years ago, the company's newly appointed CEO has decided to review the current logistics and distribution system. ACME handles about 1,500 different products in its supply chain and serves about 10,000 accounts in the Northeast. ACME is considering the following alternative strategy: Replace the two warehouses with a single warehouse located between Paramus and Newton that will serve all customer orders. We will refer to this proposed system as the centralized distribution system. The CEO insists that the same service level, 97 percent, be maintained regardless of the logistics strategy employed. TABLE 2-5 HISTORICAL DATA FOR PRODUCT A Obviously, the current distribution system with two warehouses has an important advantage over the single warehouse system because each warehouse is close to a particular subset of customers, decreasing delivery time. However, the proposed change also has an important advantage; it allows ACME to achieve either the same service level of 97 percent with much lower inventory or a higher service level with the same amount of total inventory. Intuitively this is explained as follows. With random demand, it is very likely that a higher-thanaverage demand at one retailer will be offset by a lower-than-average demand at another. As the number of retailers served by a warehouse goes up, this likelihood also goes up. Indeed, this is precisely the third principle of all forecasts described at the beginning of Section 2.2.2: aggregate forecasts are more accurate. How much can ACME reduce inventory if the company decides to switch to the centralized system but maintain the same 97 percent service level? To answer that question, we need to perform a more rigorous analysis of the inventory policy that ACME should use in both the current system and the centralized system. We will explain this analysis for two specific products, Product A and Product B, although the analysis must be conducted for all products. For both products, an order from the factory costs $60 per order and holding inventory costs are $0.27 per unit per week. In the current distribution system, the cost of transporting a product from a warehouse to a customer is, on average, $1.05 per product. It is estimated that in the centralized distribution system, the transportation cost from the central warehouse will be, on average, $1.10 per product. For this analysis, we assume that delivery lead time is not significantly different in the two systems. Tables 2-5 and 2-6 provide historical data for Products A and B, respectively. The tables include weekly demand information for each product for the last eight weeks in

全英文课《DesigningandManagingSupplyChainSystem》授课教案each market area.Observethat ProductB is a slow-moving product:the demand forProductBisfairlysmall relativetothedemandforProductATABLE2-6HISTORICALDATAFORPRODUCTBWeek203momnome11000Q09Massa12Frordere44OCTable 2-7 provides a summary of average weekly demand and the standarddeviation of weekly demand for each product. It also presents the coefficient ofvariationofdemandfacedbyeachwarehouseRecall that the standard deviation measures the absolute variability of customerdemands, while the coefficient of variation measures variability relative to averagedemand.Forinstance,inthecaseofthetwoproductsanalyzedhere,weobservethatProduct A has a much larger standard deviation while Product B has a significantlylarger coefficient of variation. This distinction between the two products plays animportant role in the final analysisFinally,notethat, for each product,the average demand faced bythewarehousein the centralized distribution system is the sum ofthe average demand faced by eachof the existing warehouses.However, the variabilityfaced by the central warehouse,measured by either the standard deviation or the coefficient of variation, is muchsmaller than the combined variabilities faced by the two existing warehouses. Thishas a major impact on inventory levels in the current and proposed systems.Theselevels,calculatedaswehavedescribed inprevioussections,areshown inTable2-8Notice that the average inventory for Product A at the warehouse in Paramus,NewJersey,isaboutSafety stock+Q/2=88Similarly, average inventory at the Newton, Massachusetts, warehouse for thesame product is about 91 units, while average inventory in the centralized warehouseis about 132 units. Thus, average inventory for Product A is reduced by about 36percent when ACME shifts from the current system to the new, centralized system-asignificant reduction in average inventoryThe average inventory for Product B is 15 at the warehouse in Paramus, 14 at thewarehouse in Newton, and 2o at the centralized warehouse. In this case, ACME isgoing to achieve a reduction of about 43 percent in average inventory level.TABLE2-7 SUMMARYOF HISTORICALDATAStandardavereaCoenstondeviation ofProductStatisticsdemandMassachusetts29213235038A8A8A8Massachusetts30858New Jersey10505E

全英文课《Designing and Managing Supply Chain System》 授课教案 each market area. Observe that Product B is a slow-moving product: the demand for Product B is fairly small relative to the demand for Product A. TABLE 2-6 HISTORICAL DATA FOR PRODUCT B Table 2-7 provides a summary of average weekly demand and the standard deviation of weekly demand for each product. It also presents the coefficient of variation of demand faced by each warehouse. Recall that the standard deviation measures the absolute variability of customer demands, while the coefficient of variation measures variability relative to average demand. For instance, in the case of the two products analyzed here, we observe that Product A has a much larger standard deviation while Product B has a significantly larger coefficient of variation. This distinction between the two products plays an important role in the final analysis Finally, note that, for each product, the average demand faced by the warehouse in the centralized distribution system is the sum of the average demand faced by each of the existing warehouses. However, the variability faced by the central warehouse, measured by either the standard deviation or the coefficient of variation, is much smaller than the combined variabilities faced by the two existing warehouses. This has a major impact on inventory levels in the current and proposed systems. These levels, calculated as we have described in previous sections, are shown in Table 2-8. Notice that the average inventory for Product A at the warehouse in Paramus, New Jersey, is about Similarly, average inventory at the Newton, Massachusetts, warehouse for the same product is about 91 units, while average inventory in the centralized warehouse is about 132 units. Thus, average inventory for Product A is reduced by about 36 percent when ACME shifts from the current system to the new, centralized system—a significant reduction in average inventory. The average inventory for Product B is 15 at the warehouse in Paramus, 14 at the warehouse in Newton, and 20 at the centralized warehouse. In this case, ACME is going to achieve a reduction of about 43 percent in average inventory level. TABLE 2-7 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL DATA

全英文课《DesigningandManagingSupplyChainSystem》授课教案TABLE2-8INVENTORYLEVELSAveragedduringlemandSatetystoctrderpoaleadtir13250258A8A8A8588JerseyJerseyToe2.4Centralizedvs.Decentralized SystemsThe analysis in the previous section raises an important practical issue: What arethe trade-offs that we need to consider in comparing centralized distribution systemswithdecentralized distribution systems?1.Safety stock. Clearly, safety stock decreases as a firm moves from adecentralized to a centralized system. The amount of decrease depends on a numberof parameters, including the coefficient of variation and the correlation between thedemandfromthedifferentmarkets.2.Service level.When the centralized and decentralized systemshave the sametotal safety stock.the servicelevel provided bythe centralized systemishigher.Asbefore, the magnitude of the increase in service level depends on the coefficient ofvariation and the correlation between the demand from the different markets.3. Overhead costs.Typically, these costs are much greater in a decentralizedsystem because there are fewer economies of scale.4.Customerleadtime.Sincethewarehousesaremuchclosertothecustomers ina decentralized system, responsetime is much shorter.5. Transportation costs. The impact on transportation costs depends on thespecifics of the situation. On one hand, as we increase the number of warehouses,outbound transportation costs-the costs incurred for delivering the items from thewarehouses to the customers-decrease because warehouses are much closerto themarket areas. On the other hand, inbound transportation costs-the costs of shippingthe products from the supply and manufacturingfacilities to the warehousesincrease.Thus,thenet impactontotaltransportationcostisnotimmediatelyclear2.6Practical IssuesIn a recent survey, materials and inventory managers were asked to identifyeffective inventory reduction strategies.Thetop seven strategies inthis survey are1. Perform periodic inventory review. In this strategy, see Section 2.2.8,inventory is reviewed at afixed time interval and everytime it is reviewed, a decisionismadeontheordersize.Theperiodicinventoryreviewpolicymakesitpossibletoidentify slow-moving and obsolete products and allows management to continuouslyreduce inventory levels.2. Provide tight management of usage rates, lead times, and safety stock. Thisallows the firm to make sure inventory is kept at the appropriate level. Such aninventory control process allows thefirmto identify,forexample, situations inwhichusage rates decrease for a few months. If no appropriate action is taken, this decreasein usage rates implies an increase in inventory levels over the same period of time

全英文课《Designing and Managing Supply Chain System》 授课教案 TABLE 2-8 INVENTORY LEVELS 2.4 Centralized vs. Decentralized Systems The analysis in the previous section raises an important practical issue: What are the trade-offs that we need to consider in comparing centralized distribution systems with decentralized distribution systems? 1. Safety stock. Clearly, safety stock decreases as a firm moves from a decentralized to a centralized system. The amount of decrease depends on a number of parameters, including the coefficient of variation and the correlation between the demand from the different markets. 2. Service level. When the centralized and decentralized systems have the same total safety stock, the service level provided by the centralized system is higher. As before, the magnitude of the increase in service level depends on the coefficient of variation and the correlation between the demand from the different markets. 3. Overhead costs. Typically, these costs are much greater in a decentralized system because there are fewer economies of scale. 4. Customer lead time. Since the warehouses are much closer to the customers in a decentralized system, response time is much shorter. 5. Transportation costs. The impact on transportation costs depends on the specifics of the situation. On one hand, as we increase the number of warehouses, outbound transportation costs—the costs incurred for delivering the items from the warehouses to the customers—decrease because warehouses are much closer to the market areas. On the other hand, inbound transportation costs—the costs of shipping the products from the supply and manufacturing facilities to the warehouses — increase. Thus, the net impact on total transportation cost is not immediately clear. 2.6 Practical Issues In a recent survey, materials and inventory managers were asked to identify effective inventory reduction strategies. The top seven strategies in this survey are 1. Perform periodic inventory review. In this strategy, see Section 2.2.8, inventory is reviewed at a fixed time interval and every time it is reviewed, a decision is made on the order size. The periodic inventory review policy makes it possible to identify slow-moving and obsolete products and allows management to continuously reduce inventory levels. 2. Provide tight management of usage rates, lead times, and safety stock. This allows the firm to make sure inventory is kept at the appropriate level. Such an inventory control process allows the firm to identify, for example, situations in which usage rates decrease for a few months. If no appropriate action is taken, this decrease in usage rates implies an increase in inventory levels over the same period of time

全英文课《DesigningandManagingSupplyChainSystem》授课教案3.Reduce safety stock levels.This can perhaps beaccomplished byfocusing onlead-time reduction4. Introduce or enhance cycle counting practice. This process replaces the annualphysical inventory count by a system where part of the inventory is counted every dayand eachitem is counted several timesperyear.5.Follow ABC approach. In this strategy, items are classified into threecategories.ClassA items include allhigh-revenueproducts,whichtypically accountfor about 80 percent of annual ($) sales and represent about 20 percent of inventorySKUs. Class B items include products that account for about 15 percent of annualsales, while Class C products represent low-revenue items, products whose value is nomore than 5 percent of sales. Because Class A items account for the major part of thebusiness, a high frequency periodic review policy (e.g.,a weekly review) isappropriate in this case. Similarly, a periodic review policy is applied to control ClassB products, although the frequency of review is not as high as that for Class Aproducts. Finally, depending on product value, the firm either keeps no inventory ofexpensive Class C products or keeps a high inventory of inexpensive Class Cproducts.6.Shiftmore inventoryorinventoryownershiptosuppliers.7. Follow quantitative approaches. These approaches are similar to thosedescribed in this chapter that focus on the right balance between inventory holdingand ordering costs.QUESTIONSTechnical question:KLF Electronics is an American manufacturer of electronicequipment.Thecompanyhasa single manufacturingfacility in SanJose,CaliforniaKLFElectronics distributes its products throughfiveregional warehouses located inAtlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, and Los Angeles. In the current distribution system,the United States is partitioned into fivemajor markets, each of which is served by asingle regional warehouse. Customers, typically retail outlets, receive items directlyfrom the regional warehouse in their market. That is, in the current distribution systemeach customer is assigned to a single market and receives deliveries from one regionalwarehouse.The warehouses receive items from the manufacturing facility. Typically, it takesabout two weeks to satisfy an order placed by any of the regional warehousesCurrently,KLF provides their customers witha service level of about90 percent.Inrecent years, KLF has seen a significant increase in competition and huge pressurefrom their customers to improve the service level and reduce costs.To improve theservice level and reduce costs, KLF would like to consider an alternative distributionstrategy in which the five regional warehouses are replaced with a single, centralwarehouse that will be in charge of all customer orders. This warehouse should be oneof the existing warehouses. The company CEO insists that whatever distributionstrategy is used, KLF will design the strategy so that service level is increased toabout 97 percent

全英文课《Designing and Managing Supply Chain System》 授课教案 3. Reduce safety stock levels. This can perhaps be accomplished by focusing on lead-time reduction. 4. Introduce or enhance cycle counting practice. This process replaces the annual physical inventory count by a system where part of the inventory is counted every day, and each item is counted several times per year. 5. Follow ABC approach. In this strategy, items are classified into three categories. Class A items include all high-revenue products, which typically account for about 80 percent of annual ($) sales and represent about 20 percent of inventory SKUs. Class B items include products that account for about 15 percent of annual sales, while Class C products represent low-revenue items, products whose value is no more than 5 percent of sales. Because Class A items account for the major part of the business, a highfrequency periodic review policy (e.g., a weekly review) is appropriate in this case. Similarly, a periodic review policy is applied to control Class B products, although the frequency of review is not as high as that for Class A products. Finally, depending on product value, the firm either keeps no inventory of expensive Class C products or keeps a high inventory of inexpensive Class C products. 6. Shift more inventory or inventory ownership to suppliers. 7. Follow quantitative approaches. These approaches are similar to those described in this chapter that focus on the right balance between inventory holding and ordering costs. QUESTIONS Technical question: KLF Electronics is an American manufacturer of electronic equipment. The company has a single manufacturing facility in San Jose, California. KLF Electronics distributes its products through five regional warehouses located in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, and Los Angeles. In the current distribution system, the United States is partitioned into five major markets, each of which is served by a single regional warehouse. Customers, typically retail outlets, receive items directly from the regional warehouse in their market. That is, in the current distribution system, each customer is assigned to a single market and receives deliveries from one regional warehouse. The warehouses receive items from the manufacturing facility. Typically, it takes about two weeks to satisfy an order placed by any of the regional warehouses. Currently, KLF provides their customers with a service level of about 90 percent. In recent years, KLF has seen a significant increase in competition and huge pressure from their customers to improve the service level and reduce costs. To improve the service level and reduce costs, KLF would like to consider an alternative distribution strategy in which the five regional warehouses are replaced with a single, central warehouse that will be in charge of all customer orders. This warehouse should be one of the existing warehouses. The company CEO insists that whatever distribution strategy is used, KLF will design the strategy so that service level is increased to about 97 percent.

全英文课《DesigningandManagingSupplyChainSystem》授课教案TABLE2-11HISTORICALDATAWeek12710123A2e991114848Atlanta834843013286989055456815R08888872255388895598BostonChicagoDallasLosAngAnswer the following three questions:a. A detailed analysis of customer demand in the five market areas reveals thatthe demand in the five regions is very similar, that is, it is common that if weeklydemand in one region is above average, so is the weekly demand in the other regionsHowdoesthisobservationaffecttheattractivenessofthenewsystem?b.Toperform a rigorousanalysis,youhaveidentified atypical product,ProductA. Table 2-11 provides historical data and includes weekly demand for this productfor the last 12 weeks in each of the market areas. An order (placed by a warehouse tothe factory) costs $5,550 (per order), and holding inventory costs $1.25 per unit perweek.In the current distribution system.the cost of transporting a product from themanufacturing facility to a warehouse is given in Table 2-12 (see the column“Inbound”).Table 2-12 also provides information about transportation cost per unitfrom each warehouse to the stores in its market area (see the column“ Outbound" ).Finally,Table2-13providesinformationabouttransportationcostsperunitproductfrom each existing regional warehouse to all other market areas, assuming thisregional warehousebecomesthecentralwarehouse.Suppose you are to compare the two systems for Product A only, what is yourrecommendation? To answer this question, you should compare costs and averageinventorylevelsfor the two strategies assumingdemands occur according to thehistorical data. Also, you should determine which regional warehouse will be used asthe centralized warehouse.c. It is proposed that in the centralized distribution strategy, that is, the one with asingle warehouse, products will be distributed using Ups Ground Service, whichguarantees that products will arrive at the warehouse in three days (O.5 week).Ofcourse,inthiscase,transportationcostforshippingaunit product fromamanufacturing facility to the warehouse increases. In fact, in this case, transportationcosts increase by 50 percent. Thus, for instance, shipping one unit from themanufacturingfacility to Atlanta will cost s18.Would you recommend using thisstrategy?Explain your answer.TABLE2-12TRANSPORTATIONCOSTSPERUNITPRODUCTTRANSPORTATIONCOSTSPERUNITPRODUCTWarehouseInboundOutbound1218Atlanta11.50Boston112888Chicago07DallasLosAngeles

全英文课《Designing and Managing Supply Chain System》 授课教案 TABLE 2-11 HISTORICAL DATA Answer the following three questions: a. A detailed analysis of customer demand in the five market areas reveals that the demand in the five regions is very similar; that is, it is common that if weekly demand in one region is above average, so is the weekly demand in the other regions. How does this observation affect the attractiveness of the new system? b. To perform a rigorous analysis, you have identified a typical product, Product A. Table 2-11 provides historical data and includes weekly demand for this product for the last 12 weeks in each of the market areas. An order (placed by a warehouse to the factory) costs $5,550 (per order), and holding inventory costs $1.25 per unit per week. In the current distribution system, the cost of transporting a product from the manufacturing facility to a warehouse is given in Table 2-12 (see the column “Inbound”). Table 2-12 also provides information about transportation cost per unit from each warehouse to the stores in its market area (see the column “Outbound”). Finally, Table 2-13 provides information about transportation costs per unit product from each existing regional warehouse to all other market areas, assuming this regional warehouse becomes the central warehouse. Suppose you are to compare the two systems for Product A only; what is your recommendation? To answer this question, you should compare costs and average inventory levels for the two strategies assuming demands occur according to the historical data. Also, you should determine which regional warehouse will be used as the centralized warehouse. c. It is proposed that in the centralized distribution strategy, that is, the one with a single warehouse, products will be distributed using UPS Ground Service, which guarantees that products will arrive at the warehouse in three days (0.5 week). Of course, in this case, transportation cost for shipping a unit product from a manufacturing facility to the warehouse increases. In fact, in this case, transportation costs increase by 50 percent. Thus, for instance, shipping one unit from the manufacturing facility to Atlanta will cost $18. Would you recommend using this strategy? Explain your answer. TABLE 2-12 TRANSPORTATION COSTS PER UNIT PRODUCT

全英文课《Designing and Managing SupplyChainSystem》授课教案TABLE2-13 TRANSPORTATION COSTS PER UNIT IN CENTRALIZED SYSTEMWarehouseAtlantaBostonChicagoDallasLos AngelesAltanta1样5位1888705066688888BostonLos Angeles

全英文课《Designing and Managing Supply Chain System》 授课教案 TABLE 2-13 TRANSPORTATION COSTS PER UNIT IN CENTRALIZED SYSTEM