Module Five Notes
"Inventory Management"
 

Index to Module Five Notes

5.1: EOQ Model

5.2: Production Lot Size Model

5.3: Planned Shortages

5.4: "A Make-or-Buy Analysis" Case

 

"When the tires get down to 4, it's time to order a whole lot more."
From a sign posted in Lieutenant Harrington's
Headquarters' Hooch somewhere in the Central
Highlands, South Vietnam, 1967
 


 5.1: Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) Model

Introduction
Since 1915, management scientists have been applying quantitative methods to help inventory managers make two critical decisions: how much inventory to order, and when to order it. With low value items, the how much to order and when decisions can be based on simple heuristics or rules of thumb. While the opening quoted order quantity decision rule was meant as my attempt at humor in the headquarters, it does serve the purpose of illustrating a simple rule of thumb for $25.00 parts.

Twenty-five years later I found myself planning inventory management strategy for Johnson and Johnson Medical as part of a University of South Florida research grant. This was quite a different situation. From $25.00 tires I went to $25,000 components. If the annual cost to carry inventory is 20% of the item value, one can quickly see that more advanced decision rules are needed to make inventory management decisions to meet demand while minimizing inventory costs.

Yet, when I went into the warehouse, it did not seem like much attention was being given to effective inventory management. There was inventory all over the place. I asked why? The answer was typical of US manufacturers in the 1980's, "we have this extra inventory "just in case" the vendor makes a late delivery." The purchaser went on to explain that the average cycle time to get components into the Oldsmar assembly facility was 21 days (cycle time is the time between when items are ordered until they are received). However, the standard deviation was 3 days, meaning they could experience cycle times as long as 30 days (average plus 3 standard deviations).

The Oldsmar operation involved assembly of components into sterilized surgical kits which were then sold to hospitals around the world. Since the assembly operation was on a tight schedule based on the 21 day inbound cycle times, shipments 9 days late were unacceptable. So.... you guessed it, the assembly plant carried 9 extra days worth of inventory "just in case" the shipment was late. That 9 extra days of inventory was costing them $125,000 every quarter in carrying cost.

These are real costs - if the company did not have those 9 days of inventory on the shelf, they could do alternative things with the money.

The Japanese taught us that rather than have "just in case there is a problem" inventory, solve the problem and switch to "just in time" management strategy. Not all cultures or systems need to be operated "just in time" but cycle time compression has been the focus of a lot of business strategies this past decade.

Well, there was a happy ending. We gave some incentives to the vendors (anything to save that $125,000 carrying cost), put in some quantitative methods to help make inventory management decisions, and rationalized the vendor base. The net result was long term savings in inventory costs.

Inventory is one luxury that product businesses have over service businesses. As we discussed in the last module, services cannot be inventoried, whereas raw material, components, work in process, and finished goods can be buffered anywhere up and down the supply chain. Sometimes the buffer is bad, such as to guard against problems in delivery, forecasting, and what ever. Sometimes the buffer is good, such as cycle stock or the stock needed to maintain operations; or product line inventory in the retail store to attract customers. How much of that buffer to order and when is the subject of this module.


Inventory Management Considerations
Inventory consists of a stock of items, the size of which is called the inventory level. Inventory management involves making decisions concerning how much inventory to order and when. The basic criterion in making these decisions is to minimize total inventory costs, such as the cost to carry inventory, the cost to order inventory, and the item cost, subject to meeting demand for the items. Inventory control involves process, procedures, and infrastructure to maintain the inventory at the desired level. Inventory management is the subject of this module. You will visit some inventory control considerations in the operations management course.

The quantitative methods designed to help make effective inventory management decisions apply to independent demand items. A simple example of an independent demand item is the automobile. Demand for the automobile is forecasted based on past demand, market conditions, and so forth. On the other hand, demand for the two axles for the automobile is derived from the demand for the automobile. Thus the demand for axles is dependent demand. Material requirements planning accounting models apply to management of dependent demand items and are not covered in this module. Those methods are covered, however, in operations management courses that are offered in many MBA programs (including ours).

When we speak of inventory, we generally refer to finished goods, raw material, spare purchased parts and supplies. But we could also speak of blood in a blood bank, cash on hand at a bank, and so forth.

The general purposes for carrying inventory may include one or more of the following. Inventory may:

1. Forming the basis for doing business. This might be the product line inventory in the retail store.

2. Provide a favorable return on investment. Sometimes inventories have value and are traded for that value.

3. Allow the buyer to take advantage of quantity discounts. It may be cost effective to buy in quantities larger than the cycle stock and store the excess because the discount for buying in large lots is substantial.

4. Protect against fluctuations in demand, delayed supply, and inflation.

5. Buffer operations from the customer. For example, a manufacturer may wish to make a long production run for economies of scale in production. The production run may result in more items than current demand. The excess is placed in inventory until the next demand period.

Inventory Costs
For the basic economic order quantity model, there are two variable costs to be minimized: the cost to hold inventory and the cost to order inventory. Generally, the unit of time measurement is annual.

Total Inventory Costs = Holding Cost + Ordering Cost

The cost relationships can be sketched out in a graph with dollars on the vertical axis and the Order Quantity on the horizontal axis, as shown in Figure 5.1.1.

Figure 5.1.1

Dollars

|

|

/

Holding Cost

|

|

/

|

|

/

|

\

/

|

\

/

|

\

/

|

+

|

/

\_

__

__

__

__

__

Ordering Cost

|

/

|

/

|_

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

Order Quantity

This chart illustrates that as the order quantity (number of items in an order) increases, the cost to order decreases and the cost to hold inventory increases on an annual basis. Note how these cost curves model the same behavior as the waiting and service cost curves of the waiting line systems. Both systems reflect points at which total costs can be minimized - where we strike a balance between the two cost curves. More on this later.

Inventory Pattern
Inventory is depleted as demand occurs. For example, let's assume that annual demand (D) for an item in inventory is 55,000. The firm could order all 55,000 items at the beginning of the year and hold them in inventory to meet demand throughout the year. Assuming that the firm works 250 days a year (unlike university students and faculty, the firm takes weekends and holidays off), the daily demand (d) is:

d = D / days in year = 55,000 / 250 = 220 items per day

Side note: I just placed my first "dot com" book order over the Internet - I placed it on a Sunday afternoon, and the order was processed and shipped that day - there goes weekends and holidays in the "dot com" world.

Back to the course... We can present a picture of this in a graph, with the vertical axis being inventory quantity, and the horizontal axis being time. The plan is that inventory just runs out as we reach day 250, and the next year's order arrives that day. The order is for 55,000 (called Order Quantity, Q) which is depleted at the rate of 220 per day. Figure 5.1.2 also shows the average inventory on hand as one half of the 55,000 or 27,500. We will see later that this average is important as it is the basis for computing inventory carrying cost.


Figure 5.1.2

Quantity

|

|

55,000

|\

|\

|

\

|

\

|

\

|

|

\

|

Avg. Q

|---

----

----

----

\---

----

----

----

|

|

\

|

|

\

|

|

\

|

|_

__

__

__

__

__

__

__

\|_

__

__

250

Time

Because it may be expensive to hold large quantities of inventory, the alternative is to order more often, thus holding less inventory in each order. Suppose the firm decides to order 5 times (number of orders, N = 5), then the order quantity, Q, is:

Q = D / N = 55,000 / 5 = 11,000  

The daily demand rate would 11,000 / 250 or 44 items per day. Ordering five times a year, would give us an order cycle time (t) of:

t = number of days in year / N = 250 / 5 = 50 days

The order cycle time is the time between when an order arrives until it is depleted. Thus, orders need to be scheduled to arrive at day 50, 100, 150, 200 and 250 in order to replenish the inventory as soon as the orders are depleted. The inventory pattern for this order quantity strategy is shown in Figure 5.1.3.



Figure 5.1.3

Quantity

|

|

|

11,000

|\

|\

|\

|\

|\

|\

|

\

|

\

|

\

|

\

|

\

|

\

|

\

|

\

|

\

|

\

|

\

|

|_

__

__

\|_

__

__

\|_

__

__

\|_

__

__

\|_

__

__

\|_

__

50

100

150

200

250

Time

This strategy would result in an average inventory of 1/2 Q or 5,500. The holding costs would be less than ordering once a year, but the ordering costs would be five times as much. That is the essence of the problem: how to balance the cost to hold inventory against the cost to order inventory. Let's examine this balance in the classic Economic Order Quantity Model (EOQ).

Economic Order Quantity Model: How Much to Order
In order for inventory managers to make use of the classic EOQ Model to determine how much inventory to order and when, they must be willing to accept the assumptions. These assumptions may seem restrictive but two points are important to consider. First, total inventory costs are fairly insensitive to deviations from the optimal order quantity as long as the deviations are not too drastic. Thus, while an assumption may not be precisely met, the impact may not be too great. Second, there are variations to the classic EOQ Model that allow us to relax the assumptions. I make a note when this is possible in the following brief discussion of each assumption.

Assumptions:

1. The daily demand rate, d, is constant and independent. We will examine a way to work around this assumption when we examine an extension to the EOQ model to consider variation in the demand rate.

2. The order quantity, Q, is constant for each order and the entire order is received at one time. We will look at another model (Economic Production Lot-Size Model) that allows the order to be received over time. We will also discuss a model that allows for varying of the order quantity, as is typically done with relatively inexpensive items.

3. The cost per order, Co, is constant and does not depend on the size of the order.

4. The unit cost, C, of the inventory item is constant and does not depend on the size of the order. We will examine a quantity discount model that allows adjustments in the unit costs as more units are ordered each time an order is placed.

5. The inventory holding cost per unit per time period, Ch, is constant.

6. Shortages such as backorders and stock outs are not permitted. We will examine a model that allows for backorders.

7. The lead time for an order is constant. Lead time is the time between when an order is placed until it is received. We will consider an extension to the EOQ Model that allows for variability in lead time.

8. The inventory level is reviewed on a continuous basis. This is generally the case when we are considering relatively expensive items. When the items are relatively inexpensive, the inventory manager may often review the inventory level every fixed time period, like once a month, and then place an order based on that level.

9. The planning horizon consists of multiple time-periods. This simply means that the item in inventory has shelf life and may be inventoried for more than one period in time. Thus, the EOQ Model does not work for daily newspapers or vegetables or any other item that has a one period shelf life.


The inputs that an inventory manager must consider in using the EOQ Model to make the order quantity decision include the annual demand (D), number of days in the year, order lead time (m), unit cost (C), holding cost rate (I), and the order cost (Co). We have discussed the annual demand, lead time, unit cost, and days in the year components.

The holding cost rate is used to compute the holding cost component, Ch. Holding costs may include the cost of financing the inventory investment. This cost of capital represents the cost associated with capital tied up in inventory. The cost of capital is usually expressed as a percentage of the amount invested, such as 20%. Other, usually smaller holding costs may include insurance, taxes, pilferage and warehouse overhead - costs that vary with the inventory investment. Thus, the holding cost rate (I) may total 20% to 25% of the inventory investment, depending upon a firm's particular situation.

The order cost, Co, covers preparation expenses for the order, such as payment, communication, invoice verification, receiving and so on. Technology has had a major impact on this expense when you compare green eyeshade days of manual order processing 30 years ago, to e-commerce and its electronic data interchange of today.
Here are the inputs for an example problem:

Annual Demand = D = 3,200 units
Working Days = 250
Unit Cost = C = $18
Holding Cost Rate = I = 22% per dollar of inventory investment per
year

Order Cost = Co = $75 per order

Other inputs needed for the EOQ Model are derived from these inputs:

Daily Demand = d = D / Working Days = 3,200 / 250 = 12.8
Holding Cost = Ch = I C = .22 * $18 = $ 3.96

The main output variable is the order quantity, Q, how much to order every time an order is placed. This can be determined by the EOQ Model or set by the inventory manager/customer. Suppose the inventory manager decides to place orders twice a month, or 24 times a year. From that decision, we can determine the order quantity, Q:

Order Quantity = Q = D / N = 3,200 / 24 = 133 (note: I rounded 133.33 to 133)

Once we know Q, we can determine the total inventory costs (TIC) for the order strategy of placing 24 orders, each with an order quantity of 133:

TIC = Annual Holding Cost + Annual Ordering Cost
TIC = (0.5) ( Q )(Ch) + (D / Q) Co
TIC = (0.5)(133)(3.96) + (3,200 / 133) 75
TIC = 263 + 1,805 = $2,068

Total costs are the criteria by which inventory managers measure the results of a particular order quantity strategy. With this strategy, the inventory manager notices that the ordering cost exceed the holding cost and makes an adjustment to order less times and carry more inventory with each order. Suppose the decision is to order once a month, or 12 times a year.

Order Quantity = Q = D / N = 3,200 / 12 = 267

Once we know Q, we can determine the total inventory costs:

TIC = Annual Holding Cost + Annual Ordering Cost
TIC = (0.5) ( Q )(Ch) + (D / Q) Co
TIC = (0.5)(267)(3.96) + (3,200 / 267) 75
TIC = 529 + 899 = $1,428

Table 5.1.1 illustrates three other strategies, ordering one time a year, ordering 50 times a year (every week minus the two weeks the firm shuts down), and ordering daily (sort of like a "just in time" strategy).


Table 5.1.1

Number
of Orders
Q = D / N
Holding Cost
(0.5)(Q)(Ch)
Order Cost
(D/Q) Co
Total
Inventory Cost
1
3200
$ 6,336
$ 75
$ 6,411
12
267
529
899
1,428
24
133
263
1,805
2,068
50
64
127
3,750
3,877
250
13
26
18,750
18,776

This table is instructive. It begins to trace out the relationship between holding cost and ordering cost, which take the form shown in Figure 5.1.1. Note how holding cost increases as Q increases, and how order cost decreases as Q increases. The minimum total cost appears at an order quantity of 267, representing 12 orders. Also note that at this minimum total cost, the holding and order costs are closer than at any other total cost.

In fact, Figure 5.1.1 tries to show that the minimum total cost occurs where order cost equals holding cost. This important observation is the basis for the EOQ Model. To derive the EOQ Model, set order cost equal to holding cost and solve for the decision variable Q. Holding cost is average inventory times the holding cost per dollar investment in inventory per year. The average inventory level is (beginning inventory + ending inventory) / 2 = ( Q + 0 ) / 2 or Q/2. Remember from the assumptions that beginning inventory is Q, the order quantity, and ending inventory is 0 right before the next order quantity arrives. Order cost is the cost per order times the number of orders (D / Q).

Holding Cost = Ordering Cost
(0.5) ( Q )(Ch) = (D / Q) Co
(0.5) (Q2) (Ch) = D Co
Q2 = ( 2 D *Co ) / Ch
EOQ = Q = Square Root [( 2 D *Co ) / Ch ]

This is pretty slick, huh! With the EOQ formula the inventory manager doesn't have to use the trial and error approach of Table 5.1.1 in trying to find the right Q... just use the EOQ formula. For this example problem:

EOQ = Q = Square Root [( 2 * 3,200 * 75 ) / 3.96 ] = 348

Now we can compute the total cost for this order quantity designed to minimize total inventory cost (TIC):

TIC = (0.5) ( Q )(Ch) + (D / Q) Co
TIC = (0.5)(348)(3.96) + (3,200 / 348) 75
TIC = 690 + 689 = $1,379

Note that at the optimal order quantity, holding cost is equal to order cost (the slight difference is due to rounding. Also note, that the optimal solution of a Q = 348 is not too far from the trial and error solution of Q = 267. In other words, we had a 30% increase in the order quantity, but only a 5% change in costs. This confirms my point earlier that with shallow dish-shaped total cost functions, decision variable deviations result in minor changes to total cost as long as we keep in the area of optimal Q. This is important information for the inventory manager since they may not always be able to order 348 units. What if the vendor only sells packages of 100 (100, 200, 300, etc.). The inventory manager knows that he or she could order 300 instead of 348 and not deviate too far from optimal costs.

Once we know the optimal order quantity, we can derive several other inventory management results:

Number of Orders = N = D / Q = 3,200 / 348 = 9.2 orders per year

Cycle time = t = Working Days / N = 250 / 9.2 = 27

Maximum Inventory Level = Q = 348

Average Inventory Level = Q/2 = 348 / 2 = 174

Even though the EOQ Model is based on fairly straightforward mathematical derivations, inventory managers rely on software to do the computations.


Using The Management Scientist Software Package
To use The Management Scientist Inventory Module to solve for EOQ, the related output results, and inventory costs, click Windows Start/Programs/The Management Scientist/The Management Scientist Icon/Continue/Select Module 8 Inventory/OK/File/New and you are ready to load this example problem.

The next dialog screen asks you to select a model. Highlight "Economic Order Quantity." Next comes the input dialog screen. Enter 3,200 for Demand, 75 for Ordering Cost, keep percent for Holding Cost selection and enter 22, enter 18 as the Unit Cost, select Compute Reorder Point, and enter 5 for the lead time. Then select Solve, and you should get the following:

Printout 5.1.1

INVENTORY MODEL

***************

ECONOMIC ORDER QUANTITY

***********************

YOU HAVE INPUT THE FOLLOWING DATA:

**********************************

ANNUAL DEMAND = 3200 UNITS PER YEAR

ORDERING COST = $75 PER ORDER

INVENTORY HOLDING COST:

A. ANNUAL INVENTORY CARRYING CHARGE = 22.0%

B. COST PER UNIT = $ 18 PER UNIT

WORKING DAYS PER YEAR = 250 DAYS

LEAD TIME FOR A NEW ORDER = 5 DAYS

INVENTORY POLICY

****************

OPTIMAL ORDER QUANTITY 348.16

ANNUAL INVENTORY HOLDING COST $689.35

ANNUAL ORDERING COST $689.35

TOTAL ANNUAL COST $1,378.70

MAXIMUM INVENTORY LEVEL 348.16

AVERAGE INVENTORY LEVEL 174.08

REORDER POINT 64.00

NUMBER OF ORDERS PER YEAR 9.19

CYCLE TIME (DAYS) 27.20


We computed these same output results with the exception of the Reorder Point, which is covered in the next subsection.

With The Management Scientist Software, the inventory manager can quickly conduct the always important sensitivity analysis. For example, what is the impact on Q and total costs of changing the holding cost percent to 28%, what is the impact on Q and total cost of a 25% decrease in demand, and so forth.

Pause and Reflect
In order to minimize total inventory costs, management should plan on ordering 348 units 9 times a year. This gives an average inventory of 174 units, a cycle time, or time between orders of 27 working days, and total inventory costs of $1,379. The assumptions include constant demand, fixed order quantity, order receipt at one time, are that demand, constant order and holding costs, constant unit price, no shortages, continuous review of the inventory and multiple period planning horizon. One other assumption concerns the lead time which is discussed in the next subsection.


When to Order
When to place an order in a continuous review inventory system is a function of the lead time, or how much time it takes between ordering the units and receiving the units, and the daily demand rate. The inventory manager wants to make sure that after the order is placed, there is enough inventory to cover the daily depletion until the order arrives.

For this problem, the lead time (m) is 5 days. Earlier, we computed the daily demand rate to be 12.8. The reorder point, in terms of the inventory level, is the daily demand rate times the lead time:

Reorder Point = r = dm = 12.8 * 5 = 64

That's it for the EOQ Model and the inventory management decisions that must be made under the strictest set of assumptions. The inventory manager now has answers to the two critical questions: how much to order (348 units), and when (when the inventory level reaches 64 units. While it is important to know the lead time in days for processing purposes, the lead time has to be expressed in units for continuous review purposes.

Did you ever visit a hardware store and after you picked an item off of a display hanger you noticed a tag stating "reorder point" - that is what we are talking about. If you haven't done that - may be you would enjoy a visit to a local hardware store and see for yourself!


Reorder Point Under Conditions of Uncertainty
A more realistic situation may be that either the lead time, or the daily demand, or both exhibit variability which must be accounted for in the reorder point formula. This section addresses this issue which concerns relaxing the first assumption (constant daily demand rate) and seventh assumption (constant lead time) introduced earlier in this section. Accounting for variability in the formula is easy, data gathering to determine the variability is the hard part.

Suppose the firm experienced the following actual lead times and daily demands after the reorder point was reached for the last 20 order cycles.


Table 5.1.2

Order
Cycle

Lead
Time

Daily
Demand

Lead Time
Demand

1

5

12.8

64

2

5

8.8

44

3

4

21

84

4

5

12.8

64

5

5

10.4

52

6

6

12.7

76

7

5

12.8

64

8

5

11.6

58

9

4

17.5

70

10

5

12.8

64

11

5

9.2

46

12

4

20.5

82

13

5

12.8

64

14

5

11.6

58

15

6

11.7

70

16

5

12.8

64

17

5

10.4

52

18

5

15.2

76

19

4

16

64

20

6

10.7

64

Note again that lead time demand is a function of both the lead time and the daily demand (lead time demand = lead time times daily demand). The lead time stays fairly constant, as it should, or the firm should shop around for a new vendor or give some incentive to the vendor to get the lead time fixed. This might entail going to more dedicated forms of transportation. The daily demand variability is harder to control in the short term. In the long term, demand can be changed by changing the price, the quality and so forth.

The variable of interest is the lead time demand since that effects the order point. The average lead time demand can be computed as 64 (Mean lead time demand = (64 + 44 + 84 + 64 + ... + 64) / 20). Note earlier that the reorder point under conditions of certainty was 64 (lead time times the daily demand). Also note that during some order cycles, the lead time demand was greater than 64.

For example, in order cycle number 18 the lead time was right on target at five days, but the daily demand came out to be 15.2 days. This gives a mean time demand of 76 units - fully 12 more units above the expected lead time demand of 64. If demand is greater than expected after an order is placed, or the lead time is longer than expected after an order is placed, or the lead time demand is greater than the order point lead time demand - guess what... that's right, the firm experiences a stock out. Of course, the opposite is true. If, after an order is placed, the demand slows down and/or the lead time is shorter than expected, then more inventory than expected will be on hand when the order arrives. Generally, being out of stock is more critical than having some level of additional stock.

To guard against a stock out under conditions of uncertainty, firms add safety stock to the mean lead time demand. Here is the formula:

Reorder Point = Mean Lead Time Demand + Safety Stock
Reorder Point = 64 + (Z Score times Std DevLead Time Demand)

From Table 5.1.2, we can compute the standard deviation of lead time demand to be 10.7. The Z score is how we translate the customer service objective into the formula. Suppose the firm wants to provide a customer service level of 97.5 percent. This means, that the firm wants to be able to meet 97.5 percent of the demand. This could be 97.5 percent of the demand during one order cycle, or 97.5 of the order cycles will have demand met, or however the firm wants to operationalize the customer service level. Another way of looking at this is to express the 97.5 percent customer service level as the complement: there is a 2.5 percent chance of a stock out. In Excel, if you enter =NORMSINV(0.975) in an active cell, you get a Z Score of 1.96 (almost 2). The reorder point is:

Reorder Point = 64 + (1.96 * 10.7) = 64 + 21 = 85

Do you see what we have done? We set the reorder point higher than the expected lead time demand to guard against stock outs. The safety stock of 21 will be used when the lead time is shorter than expected, and/or the daily demand is greater than expected. The safety stock will be replenished when the lead time is shorter than expected, and/or daily demand is less than expected.

But there is "no free lunch." The safety stock incurs inventory holding costs:

Safety Stock Holding Costs = Ch * Safety Stock
Safety Stock Holding Costs = $3.96 * 21 = $83.16.

This may not seem much to guard against a stock out - but what if the firm managed 2,000 stock keeping units - those safety stock costs add up. In my experience in the US Air Force, we only went to 95% or 97.% customer service levels in wartime. During peacetime, we ran 85% customer service levels. For this firm, an 85% customer service level gives the following reorder point and costs:

Reorder Point = 64 + (1.04 * 10.7) = 64 + 11 = 75
Safety Stock Holding Costs = $3.96 * 11 = $43.56

Setting safety stock is just like adding a buffer to a forecast. Whether a firm uses a formal mathematical approach or judgment, we often find safety or buffer stocks to guard against stock outs in inventory systems.

The Management Scientist has an inventory module that allows us to incorporate
probabilistic demand during lead time into the EOQ order-quantity/reorder point model. This is illustrated for the above example, using the 97.5% customer service level (2.5% chance of a stock out) in Printout 5.1.3 below.


Printout 5.1.3

INVENTORY MODEL

***************

ORDER QUANTITY-REORDER POINT WITH PROBABILISTIC DEMAND

******************************************************

YOU HAVE INPUT THE FOLLOWING DATA:

**********************************

ANNUAL DEMAND = 3200 UNITS PER YEAR

ORDERING COST = $75 PER ORDER

INVENTORY HOLDING COST:

A. ANNUAL INVENTORY CARRYING CHARGE = 22.0%

B. COST PER UNIT = $ 18 PER UNIT

WORKING DAYS PER YEAR = 250 DAYS

LEAD TIME DEMAND DISTRIBUTION IS NORMAL WITH

A. MEAN = 64 UNITS

B. STANDARD DEVIATION = 10.7 UNITS

PROBABILITY OF A STOCKOUT = 0.025

INVENTORY POLICY

****************

OPTIMAL ORDER QUANTITY 348.16

ANNUAL INVENTORY HOLDING COST $772.82

ANNUAL ORDERING COST $689.35

TOTAL ANNUAL COST $1,462.17

MAXIMUM INVENTORY LEVEL 369.23

AVERAGE INVENTORY LEVEL 195.16

REORDER POINT 85.08

NUMBER OF ORDERS PER YEAR 9.19

CYCLE TIME (DAYS) 27.20

SAFETY STOCK 21.08

ANNUAL SAFETY STOCK COST $83.47

EXPECTED STOCKOUTS PER YEAR .23

PROBABILITY OF A STOCKOUT PER CYCLE .0250



Quantity Discounts
The next assumption that we want to relax is assumption number four - constant unit cost, C. The idea here is that the vendor may give a price discount to the firm if the firm would agree to buy larger order quantities. This is called the "supply chain shell game" or who can we get to hold the inventory in the supply chain. When a vendor encourages a firm to order in larger quantities, the vendor is simply shifting the holding costs to the next node in the supply chain.

Suppose the vendor offers the firm the following discount schedule:


Table 5.1.3

Order Size
Unit Cost

Discount

Unit

Cost (C)

0 - 999
0
$18.00
1,000 - 2,999
5%
$17.10
> 2,999
10%
$16.20

Recall that we computed the EOQ as 348 for the unit cost of $18. The total inventory costs for this EOQ was:

TIC = Annual Holding Cost + Annual Ordering Cost
TIC = (0.5) ( Q )(Ch) + (D / Q) Co
TIC = (0.5) ( Q )(I * C) + (D / Q) Co
TIC = (0.5) (348) (0.22 * 18) + (3,200 / 348 ) 75
TIC = $1,379

Note that I substituted the holding cost interest rate times the unit cost for Ch so that we can prepare for analyses in which the unit cost changes. The total cost for this inventory order quantity, including demand times unit cost is:

TC = TIC + ( D * C ) = $1,379 + (3,200 * 18) = $1,689 + $57.600

TC = $58,979

Does the firm want to take a discount? To answer this question, we run the new numbers at the discount rates. Let's look at the 5% discount first, which gives a new unit cost of $17.1. The first step is to compute the EOQ.

EOQ = Square Root [ ( 2 D * Co ) / ( I * C) ]
EOQ = Square Root [ ( 2 * 3,200 * 75 ) / ( 0.22 * 17.1) ]
EOQ = 358

The EOQ comes out to be less than the minimum order size to get the discount price so we adjust up to the order size needed to get the 5% discount. That is, the firm should order 1,000 units. The reason that we do not go higher than the minimum order size for the discount is that the optimum order quantity is 358 and we want to stay as close to the optimum as possible while still getting the price discount.

Letting Q = 358, we now solve for total inventory and total costs:

TIC = (0.5) ( Q )(I * C) + (D / Q) Co
TIC = (0.5) (1,000) (0.22 * 17.10) + ( 3,200 / 1,000 ) * 75
TIC = $1,881 + 240
TIC = $2121
TC = TIC + (D * C) = $2121 + (3,200 * 17.10) = $56,841

Here, the firm can save by taking the 5% discount. Even though the total inventory cost is higher because the firm uses an order quantity above the EOQ, the discount was significant enough to result in a total savings compared to not taking the 5% discount.
The results obtained so far are shown in Table 5.1.4. Also included in this table is an evaluation of the EOQ, adjusted order quantity and total cost for the 10% discount. The computations are made in a manner similar to the evaluation of the 5% discount.


Table 5.1.4

Order Size
Unit Cost

Discount

Unit

Cost (C)

EOQ
Adjusted Q

(to get discount)

TIC
TC
0 - 999
0
$18.00
348
348
$1,379
$58,979
1,000 - 2,999
5%
$17.10
358
1,000
$2,121
$56,841
> 2,999
10%
$16.20
367
3,000
$5,426
$57,266

Note how the TC curve reached a minimum at the 5% discount level, then began to climb as the holding cost for ordering in quantities of 3,000 exceeded the price discount savings.

Fortunately, when purchasers negotiate with vendors the discount schedule, software is available for the rapid computation of the order quantities and costs associated with various discount schedules. The Management Scientist Inventory Module includes an EOQ with Quantity Discounts option. The output for this option is shown in Printout 5.1.2 for the above example.


Printout 5.1.2

INVENTORY MODEL

***************

ECONOMIC ORDER QUANTITY WITH QUANTITY DISCOUNTS

***********************************************

YOU HAVE INPUT THE FOLLOWING DATA:

**********************************

QUANTITY DISCOUNT INFORMATION

CATEGORY UNIT COST MINIMUM QUANTITY

-------- --------- ----------------

1 $18.00 0

2 $17.10 1000

3 $16.20 3000

ANNUAL DEMAND = 3200 UNITS PER YEAR

ORDERING COST = $75 PER ORDER

ANNUAL INVENTORY CARRYING CHARGE = 22

WORKING DAYS PER YEAR = 250 DAYS

INVENTORY POLICY

****************

OPTIMAL ORDER QUANTITY 1,000.00

ANNUAL INVENTORY HOLDING COST $1,881.00

ANNUAL ORDERING COST $240.00

ANNUAL PURCHASE COST $54,720.00

TOTAL ANNUAL COST $56,841.00

MAXIMUM INVENTORY LEVEL 1,000.00

AVERAGE INVENTORY LEVEL 500.00

NUMBER OF ORDERS PER YEAR 3.20

CYCLE TIME (DAYS) 78.13


The next order of business is to examine two more classic inventory models: the production lot size model and the planned shortages model.

Pause and Reflect
The classic EOQ model determines two inventory management strategies: how much to order when an order is placed, and when to place the order. The classic EOQ model assumes the following are constant: daily demand, order quantity, cost per order, unit cost, holding cost, and lead time. We also examined two extensions where we first relaxed the assumption that daily demand and lead time were constant which lead to adjustments in the "when to order" decision; and second where we relaxed the assumption that the unit cost was constant which lead to adjustments in the order quantities.



5.2: Economic Production Lot Size Model

The next model was originally designed for situations in which the inventory is produced by the firm, rather than ordered by the firm. As such, the order cost changes to a setup cost. Since production runs generally take some time between equipment setup and production, the order is received over time, rather than at one point in time. In the classic production lot size model, this is called the production rate.

This model can actually be used for situations in which the firm orders their inventory, rather than produces it, and operates under the condition that the order is not received at one point in time but over time. This is a very common. Perhaps a partial order is received on Monday, another partial order on Tuesday, and the third partial order on Wednesday. Thus, the assumption pertaining to the order received at one point in time (part of Assumption Two in Module 5.1 Notes) is relaxed in this model.

We will use The Management Scientist to examine a production lot size model example input and output. The interested reader is referred to pages 541-543 in the text for the formulas from which the output is derived. In Printout 5.2.1, note we are asked to provide a setup cost rather than an order cost. Also note that we are asked to provide an annual production rate. The setup cost and production rate would apply to situations where the firm produced the item. If the firm ordered the item, then the setup cost is simply the order cost from Module 5.1 Notes, and the production rate is the rate at which units are received over time. The vendor would have to provide this information. With 250 working days in the year, I am assuming for this example that the daily receipt (production) rate is 12,000 / 250 or 48 units a day. All other input is the same as the example in the EOQ illustration of Module 5.1 Notes.


Printout 5.2.1

INVENTORY MODEL

***************

ECONOMIC PRODUCTION LOT SIZE

****************************

YOU HAVE INPUT THE FOLLOWING DATA:

**********************************

ANNUAL DEMAND = 3200 UNITS PER YEAR

ANNUAL PRODUCTION RATE = 12000 UNITS PER YEAR

SETUP COST = $75 PER SETUP

INVENTORY HOLDING COST:

A. ANNUAL INVENTORY CARRYING CHARGE = 22.0%

B. COST PER UNIT = $ 18 PER UNIT

WORKING DAYS PER YEAR = 250 DAYS

LEAD TIME FOR A NEW ORDER = 5 DAYS

INVENTORY POLICY

****************

PRODUCTION LOT SIZE 406.56

ANNUAL INVENTORY HOLDING COST $590.32

ANNUAL SETUP COST $590.32

TOTAL ANNUAL COST $1,180.64

MAXIMUM INVENTORY LEVEL 298.14

AVERAGE INVENTORY LEVEL 149.07

REORDER POINT 64.00

NUMBER OF SETUPS PER YEAR 7.87

CYCLE TIME (DAYS) 31.76



The output shows the order quantity is now 406.56 versus 348 when using the EOQ model. Note carefully that the maximum inventory level and average inventory level are less than 348 and 174, respectively, under the EOQ model. This is because the units are not received all at once, but rather over time. While items are being received over time, demand continues thereby resulting in a reduction in the maximum and average inventories. With this reduction in inventory levels, comes a reduction in holding cost.

The order (or production) cost is also lower since there are fewer orders. The total inventory cost with the economic production lot size model is $1,180 compared to $1,379 with the EOQ model as a result. Of course, the firm would have to carefully evaluate using the same holding cost and order cost when the shipment is received over time since there may be more cost associated with monitoring and in-checking orders over time rather than all at once.


5.3: Planned Shortages
The last model we will examine relaxes the assumption that there can be no shortages (Assumption Number 6 in Module Notes 5.1). This means that backorders and lost sales can occur. While firms generally do not plan an inventory management strategy of lost sales, many do plan a strategy of allowing backorders. For example, when is the last time you when to Service Merchandise, saw an item you liked on a shelf, filled out the paper work for the item, and upon checking out were told they were out of stock of that item - would you like a substitute item or would you like the item delivered to your home in 4 days via UPS? Guess what, Service Merchandise just transferred their inventory holding cost to you. This works as long as Service Merchandise knows that most of their customers will accept either a substitute or will wait for 4 days - otherwise a backorder becomes a lost sale.

As with the economic production lot size model, we will examine the input and output of the planned shortages model by using The Management Scientist. The interested reader is referred to pp. 544-548 in the text for the formulas from which the output is derived. Let's continue with the example problem from Module 5.1 Notes. This time, assume that backorders are allowed. All of the input is the same as the example in Printout 5.1.1, except we added a backorder cost of $5. This could be for the extra paper work in handling a backorder, and/or the extra level of transportation, such as by UPS.


Printout 5.3.1


INVENTORY MODEL

***************

ECONOMIC ORDER QUANTITY WITH PLANNED SHORTAGES

**********************************************

YOU HAVE INPUT THE FOLLOWING DATA:

**********************************

ANNUAL DEMAND = 3200 UNITS PER YEAR

ORDERING COST = $75 PER ORDER

INVENTORY HOLDING COST:

A. ANNUAL INVENTORY CARRYING CHARGE = 22.0%

B. COST PER UNIT = $ 18 PER UNIT

BACKORDER COST = $5 PER UNIT PER YEAR

WORKING DAYS PER YEAR = 250 DAYS

LEAD TIME FOR A NEW ORDER = 5 DAYS

INVENTORY POLICY

****************

OPTIMAL ORDER QUANTITY 466.06

ANNUAL INVENTORY HOLDING COST $287.36

ANNUAL ORDERING COST $514.95

ANNUAL BACKORDER COST $227.59

TOTAL ANNUAL COST $1,029.91

MAXIMUM INVENTORY LEVEL 260.08

AVERAGE INVENTORY LEVEL 72.57

MAXIMUM BACKORDERS 205.98

REORDER POINT * -141.99

NUMBER OF ORDERS PER YEAR 6.87

CYCLE TIME (DAYS) 36.41

* NOTE: THE NEGATIVE REORDER POINT INDICATES THAT THE ORDER

SHOULD BE PLACED WHEN THE NUMBER OF BACKORDERS =141.99



This model results in a total inventory cost savings when compared to the EOQ model without planned shortages in Printout 5.1.1. That's because the inventory is carried as backorders rather than as units in storage so the inventory holding cost is reduced more than the additional backorder cost. Of course, the firm runs the risk that backorders can become lost sales, then the $5 backorder cost is unrealistic.



That completes our coverage of the classic quantitative methods designed to help inventory managers determine how much inventory to order, and when to order it. These methods involve a fair amount of computation so inventory managers generally rely on software for the "number crunching." Because of their sophistication, these models are generally used for relatively high cost items - those items that warrant continuous review.

For low cost items, the inventory manager may wish to use a simple periodic review inventory model as discussed in pages 561- 564 in the text. That is, instead of continuous review of the inventory (which is required to know when the reorder point is reached), the inventory manager may elect to view (count) the inventory at set time intervals, such as once a month. Then, an order is placed for the difference between the current inventory level and the maximum desired inventory level.

For very inexpensive items the inventory manager may wish to use even a similar model such as a "two-bin" system. For example, in the hardware store, penny nails may be on display in a bin. When the bin is empty, a full bin is brought from the store room and an order is placed for another bin.

Another model is designed to help evaluate those situations where the inventory is perishable, such as with vegetables and newspapers. Simulation models, as discussed in Production and Operations Management courses, work well for these situations so we will not go into them here.

We close this Module by examining the "Make-or-Buy Analysis" Case on pages 574-575 in the text.


5.4: "A Make-or-Buy Analysis"

This case requires that we compare making an inventoried item versus buying it from an outside supplier. We will follow the numbered questions on page 575 in the text.

1. The holding cost is made of of four items, as shown below. Note that I converted some of the items into percents for a common unit of measurement. The holding cost applies to both making and buying options,

Cost of Capital = 14%
Taxes/Insurance = $24,000/$600,000 = 4%
Shrinkage = $9,000/$600,000 = 1.5%
Warehouse Overhead = ($15,000/$600,000) = 2.5%
Total = 22%

2. The ordering cost applies to the "buy" option.

2 Hours at $28.00 = $56.00
Other Expenses ($2,375/125) = $19.00
Total = $75.00

3. The setup cost applies to the "make" option.

8 Hours at $50.00 = $400 per setup


4. and 5.

First, examine the "buy" option: order and buy from the supplier - the EOQ Model. Assume in the case that one week = 5 days. The output includes the pertinent inventory policy.

INVENTORY MODEL

***************

ORDER QUANTITY-REORDER POINT WITH PROBABILISTIC DEMAND

******************************************************

YOU HAVE INPUT THE FOLLOWING DATA:

**********************************

ANNUAL DEMAND = 3200 UNITS PER YEAR

ORDERING COST = $75 PER ORDER

INVENTORY HOLDING COST:

A. ANNUAL INVENTORY CARRYING CHARGE = 22.0%

B. COST PER UNIT = $ 18 PER UNIT

WORKING DAYS PER YEAR = 250 DAYS

LEAD TIME DEMAND DISTRIBUTION IS NORMAL WITH

A. MEAN = 64 UNITS

B. STANDARD DEVIATION = 10 UNITS

PROBABILITY OF A STOCKOUT = 0.11

INVENTORY POLICY

****************

OPTIMAL ORDER QUANTITY 348.16

ANNUAL INVENTORY HOLDING COST $738.45

ANNUAL ORDERING COST $689.35

TOTAL ANNUAL COST $1,427.80

MAXIMUM INVENTORY LEVEL 360.56

AVERAGE INVENTORY LEVEL 186.48

REORDER POINT 76.40

NUMBER OF ORDERS PER YEAR 9.19

CYCLE TIME (DAYS) 27.20

SAFETY STOCK 12.40

ANNUAL SAFETY STOCK COST $49.10

EXPECTED STOCKOUTS PER YEAR 1.01

PROBABILITY OF A STOCKOUT PER CYCLE .1100


Note that I had to run the output twice to get the probability of a stock out per order cycle. The first run gave me the number of order cycles (number of orders) as 9.2. Since the case information said that one stock out per year (one order cycle will be out of stock) is acceptable, I then computed the probability of a stock out as 1 / 9.2 = 0.11. This was input into The Management Scientist to get the safety stock and safety stock cost as shown above.

Note also that to get the Total Cost, we add the Total Inventory Cost to the unit cost:

TC = TIC + D * C = $1427.80 + (3,200 * 18) = $59,029



Next, we examine the "make" alternative. I assumed an annual production rate of 12,000, even though the case said that five months of production capacity was available, I needed to annualize the 1,000 units of capacity a month. Since the demand is less than the capacity, this assumption will work. The output includes the inventory policy.

INVENTORY MODEL

***************

ECONOMIC PRODUCTION LOT SIZE

****************************

YOU HAVE INPUT THE FOLLOWING DATA:

**********************************

ANNUAL DEMAND = 3200 UNITS PER YEAR

ANNUAL PRODUCTION RATE = 12000 UNITS PER YEAR

SETUP COST = $400 PER SETUP

INVENTORY HOLDING COST:

A. ANNUAL INVENTORY CARRYING CHARGE = 22.0%

B. COST PER UNIT = $ 17 PER UNIT

WORKING DAYS PER YEAR = 250 DAYS

LEAD TIME FOR A NEW ORDER = 10 DAYS

INVENTORY POLICY

****************

PRODUCTION LOT SIZE 966.13

ANNUAL INVENTORY HOLDING COST $1,324.88

ANNUAL SETUP COST $1,324.88

TOTAL ANNUAL COST $2,649.76

MAXIMUM INVENTORY LEVEL 708.49

AVERAGE INVENTORY LEVEL 354.25

REORDER POINT 128.00

NUMBER OF SETUPS PER YEAR 3.31

CYCLE TIME (DAYS) 75.48


This module does not compute the cost of safety stock. Since there are 3.3 production runs or cycles a year, the probability of a stock out (one cycle out of stock) is 1 / 3. 3 or 30%. The Z score for 30% is 0.52. The reorder point is then:

Reorder Point = 128 + Safety Stock
Reorder Point = 128 + Z * Std DevDemand During Lead Time
Reorder Point = 128 + (.52 * 20) = 138

The annual inventory holding cost must be increased to recognize the safety stock. The maximum and average inventory levels also recognize the addition of 10 units of safety stock. The new holding cost is $1325 + (0.22 * 17 * 10 units safety stock) = $1,362. The revised total inventory cost for the "make" option is $1,362 + $1,325 = $2,687. This gives a new Total Cost of:

TC = TIC + (D * C) = $2,687 + (3,200 * $17) = $57,087.

From an economic point of view, it appears that Wagner Fabricating Company should make the item and save about 3%.

 


| Return to Module Overview | Return to top of page |

  About the Course
Module Schedule
WebBoard