财务管理外文文献

Project Scheduling in the Financial Management of Supply

Chains(excerpts)

Author:Durukan Kalyoncu, Guldane

Acceptance Date: June 2012

In literature, numerous publications on managing supply chains exist most of which has focused on the physical aspects of the supply chains. Although the bottom line is very important for managers, there are a limited number of publications that combine the financial management of supply chains with the physical management. Those studies address the supply chain financial performance measurement with different approaches and measures; one of which has been Cash Conversion Cycle (CCC). Cash Conversion Cycle is a metric that measures the time elapsed from the payment to the suppliers till the receipt of money from the customers. Thus it is a two dimensional concept that incorporates time and financial considerations simultaneously. In that respect it enables companies to integrate the operational scheduling with the financial scheduling.

When the components of the CCC are examined separately; the Average Payable and Average Receivable Terms are related to the company financial policy and contract terms between supply chain partners. On the other hand, Inventory Conversion Period depends on the firm’s inventory policy. Fig ure 1 assumes that the inventory is in retailer’s warehouse on the same day with order placement to the manufacturer. Also it assumes that there is no outbound transportation time so on the day that inventory leaves the retailer’s warehouse it is received by the customer and Accounts Receivable is issued. According to those assumptions Inventory Conversion Period depends on the optimal ordering quantity.

In the sense that, CCC is embracing Account Payable, Account Receivable and Inventory Conversion Period; first two are related to timing of cash inflows and outflows and the third is related to firm’s operations policy, it is a bridging measurement between operational and financial planning.

Also, since CCC is the time passed from cash outflow to cash inflow, it measures how long the firm needs outside financing. Thus many scholars (Farris and Hutchison (2002), Soenen (1993), Binti Mohamad and Binti Mohd Saad (2010)) stated that the shorter CCC the better the company finances are. However, there are some complications regarding the Cash Conversion Cycle metric approach in financial management of supply chains. Even though supply chain partners put considerable efforts to have control over the stream of cash inflow by managing payment terms, these cash inflows are mostly probabilistic due to unpredictable conditions of the downstream players. On the other hand cash outflows to the upper layers of the chain is deterministic; however this depends on the cash available at the time. Figure 2 depicts the “downs tream” and “upstream” supply chain partners.

Upstream Partners Downstream Partners Vendor Manufacturer Distributor Retailer Customer. Supply Chain Levels As seen from the Gupta and Dutta’s study (2011), the

early payment of the debts result in the lowest cash outflow at the current period, yet it does not necessarily result in the lowest present value of the cash outflow. Thus managing cash flows in an efficient way is not an easy task taking into account the probabilistic inflows in addition to the tradeoffs between prompt payment of the debt, which reduces the amount to be paid, and late payment, which increases the interest earned on cash deposits. Those financial considerations become even more complicated for supply chains with long Lead Times. So Lead Time reduction has a huge strategic importance for successful operation of those chains. Nevertheless, managing Lead Time, which is mostly deterministic, is not an easy task either because it affects the cash flow stream in direct or indirect ways. Indirectly, Lead Time reduction affects the cash flows by improving customer service and responsiveness to demand shifts. First of all, Lead Time compression is a costly process including labor cost and additional transportation cost. Second, inventory holding cost can be reduced due to lower requirement for safety , reducing Lead Time reduces the Cash Conversion Cycle. As the Cash Conversion Cycle measures how long the company’s cash is tied to accounts payables and inventories till fulfilling an order; shortening the Lead Time decreases cost of borrowing, and also it enables the company to deliver the products or services sooner; thus the receivable collection

period starts many scholars worked on Lead Time compression in supply chains such as Beesley(1996) and Towill (1996) they both ignore the investment costs needed to achieve a reduction in Lead Time. Also neither Beesley nor Towill touch the cost of borrowing issue, but rather they emphasize the indirect financial effects of time reduction, such as fast response to market and enabling a more accurate demand forecast. What is more, most of the supply chain financial modeling articles are not taking into account the time flexibility factor. As known, companies can reduce Lead Times in exchange for a cost. So while studying the financial aspects of the supply chain this flexibility should be taken into account. Whereas Ben-Daya and Raouf’s (1994) study focuses on the Lead Time flexibility issue by studying the costs of Lead Time reduction along with the effects on the inventory policy such as reorder point and optimal order quantity which affects ordering and inventory holding costs, their study doesn’t model a whole supply chain where the transactions with upstream players are taken into account.

To sum up, in literature there is lack of a comprehensive approach for the financial management of the supply chains. Also today’s increasingly dynamic companies cannot be managed with static models. Thus, predictive integrated models that take in to account instable financial markets and also capable of ensuring required liquidity while providing timely and efficient response to orders is crucial. So, with the purpose of building a comprehensive approach that embraces time and money considerations simultaneously, our study uses Cash Conversion Cycle as the decision variable with respect to which we assess the Financial Performance. By using project-scheduling methods in timing of the operations and payments, our study aims to find the optimal Cash Conversion Cycle that generates the highest accumulated cash at the end of the one-year period.

However, in our model cash inflow is probabilistic thus we don’t have control

over its effect on the optimal CCC. As a result some of the values that are changed in order to find the optimal CCC are order quantity, reorder point and the Lead Time and Payable term. So our study starts with analyzing the issues affecting financial management of supply chains and then covers the related previous work that the model is built upon. In the next issues affecting the financial management in SC are discussed. In section III review of the literature is presented and in Section IV the mathematical model is presented with the objective of maximizing the accumulated net cash at the end of a one-year period. The model considers timing of the cash inflow and outflows and Lead Time crashing costs simultaneously. Finally illustrative example and sensitivity analysis are presented followed by the conclusion part summarizing findings of the study.

Bullwhip effect: It is one of most significant reasons of supply chain inefficiency. It is the amplification of demand variance as the demand information passes from the lower levels (customers) of the supply chain to the upper levels (manufacturers level). It may be severely destructive for the financial management of the supply chain as a whole, particularly the upper levels are the ones most affected. Each partner, knowing that the forecasts they retrieve from the lower partners are not one hundred percent accurate, builds safety stock. Thus the orders to the upper levels increase as more and more safety stock is built in the system, which leads the upper tiers to have an impression that the demand is more than its actual level. So longer Lead Times result in higher safety stock levels which in turn leads bigger amplifications in the upper levels as known as the Bullwhip Effect. Demand forecast: For make to stock inventory systems demand forecast is the most important aspect of production management. As cycle time increases, forecasts have to be made for farther periods, which in turn increases the forecast errors. And when the accuracy of the forecast decreases, firms are forced to keep more safety inventory and thus incur higher inventory holding cost. On the flip side of the coin, even if a firm decides to keep low inventory levels, in such a blurry environment there is high probability that it falls short in responding to customer orders which hurts the profits as much as the inventory holding costs. Thus, by shortening the supply chain cycle time the entire chain benefits from accurate demand forecast.

Cost of borrowing/ investing: Cost of borrowing is another key aspect of the financial management of the supply chain. Since more interest is charged with the time elapsed over the issue date of the debt, firms should ensure collection of money from the customers as early as possible in order to pay the debts. Apparently, collection period’s primary determinant is the cycle time since the customers usually are not willing to pay before they receive the product unless some incentives such as discounts are offered in advance.

Inventory holding cost: According to Ben-Daya and Raouf’s(1994) economic order quantity (EOQ) model, as Lead Time increases, optimal order quantity Q* increases; therefore the average inventory held by the firm over the year, and corresponding holding cost increase. Apart from the physical cost of inventory holding, higher obsolescence cost related to higher levels of inventory should be taken into account in case of change in technology or new trends in demand. What is more, opportunity

cost is another side of the inventory holding in the sense that the capital is tied to inventory rather than other money-making investments. Lead Time crashing cost: Firms can shorten the time needed to produce and deliver the products

to customers but this can be done at a cost known as reduction or crashing cost. Lead Time vs. crashing cost graph is negative exponential (decreasing function). Crashing process starts with the longest lead (processing) time for the activities which corresponds to the least cost, then as the Lead Time is reduced the cost increases exponentially as illustrated in Figure 3. Consequently, the total Lead Time can be decomposed into components depending on the amount invested in reducing/crashing the Lead Time.

Cash to Cash cycle, which is first defined by Gitman (1974) was further examined by Gallinger (1997) as the length of the period that the firm's operating cycle needs to be su pported by costly financing. And he adds; “You can think of the operating cycle as the number of days sales are invested in inventories and receivables'' (Gallinger, 1997). As seen from Gallinger’s definition longer Cash Conversion Cycles damage company finances in terms of cost of borrowing/ financing the necessary funds. Thus, shortening the CCC is a key metric for the company financial management. In that sense, further analysis of the CCC made by Soenen (1993) decomposes it into three sections:

1. The length of the credit term that the company gets from its suppliers,

2. The length of the production process, and

3. The number of days the final products remains in inventory before they are sold.

So, in this study we are going to examine the effects of lead-time reduction; in other words shortening the total lead time along with the optimal timing for Accounts Receivables and Payables on financial management of the supply chain. Besides reducing the CCC, Lead Time compression benefits the organizations in other ways too. Beesley (1996) states that, the idea of quick response in the retail environment and that of just-in- time (JIT) in the manufacturing arena are two important aspects where time reduction plays a critical role. The value of time in marketing is vital says Beesley and adds, as businesses become more and more competitive, the time factor becomes more critical. What is more, according to him, since the end consumers demand high variety of choice, retailers today should hold minimal stock so that they can maximize the product range held under one roof and also offer a better service through faster replenishment. The author states that although these factors give competitive advantage to the companies, customers may not be willing to pay more for speed and variety. The aim in “time compression” is to cut the amount of time consumed by business processes; therefore the process of converting inputs into outputs (manufacturing time) takes a shorter period of time. Thus the key to achieve time compression is getting rid of wasted time and rearranging the sequence of the activities accordingly. However Beesley draws attention to a very important fact that the logistical strategies are most effective when applied to the supply chain in its broadest context where the scope of supply chain is anything that converts a resource into a delivered, consumable product or service. This is called the “holistic approach” or a total system view according

to Beesley. So, according to him in his paper “ Time compressio n in the Supply Chain”, competitiveness should come from the whole supply chain system, not just from the company (producer) itself. Besides shortening the Lead Time another way to improve the Cash Conversion Cycle is extending the average accounts payable term according to Farris and Hutchison (2002). Since it is the time elapsed between issuance of the debt and the cash outflow, longer payable terms enables companies to obtain interest-free financing. However Farris and Hutchison omit the penalty that the manufacturers may charge for a longer payment term, which will increase the cash outflows. What is more, when stating the primary leverage points to manage CCC, they put emphasis on reducing the average accounts receivable term however in order to encourage the downstream partners of supply chain to make early payments, the company should offer discount, which in turn reduces the amount of cash inflows. And finally, reducing the total Lead Time is not free of charge to companies. In that sense Nobanee (2009) worked on an improved way of modeling the optimal CCC for supply chains where he defines the optimal CCC as follows, See Figure 1: Optimal Cash Conversion Cycle = Optimal Inventory Conversion Period + Optimal Receivable Collection Period – Optimal Payab le Deferral Period. As seen from Nobanee’s equations compressing each component to its shortest time will not necessarily lead to better financial results. The optimal points should be found for each component of the lead-time. Since the Cash Conversion Cy cle measures how long the company’s cash is tied to fulfilling an order until the company receives cash, shortening the Lead Time affects the optimal Cash Conversion Cycle and accordingly the financial management of the supply chain in two ways:

In our model, working on a three tier supply chain consisting of a manufacturer, retailer and a customer, we are examining the financial effects of any change made in the components of Cash Conversion Cycle on the retailer. Our retailer bases its inventory planning on forecast of demand so places order to the manufacturer in advance by using Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) Model. The retailer issues accounts payable upon placing the order to the manufacturer. The shipment of the items occurs after the manufacturer’s o rder-processing time. So it takes order processing time plus inbound transportation time for the retailer to receive the items which is initially 20 days in our model.

We assume that contract terms for both accounts payable and accounts receivable are not changed for the one-year period. In the model the pattern of collection from customers is probabilistic, whereas the pattern of payment to manufacturer depends on the payment received from customers. This is the case to assure that the cash in hand is sufficient to pay the current debt. The retailer offers a credit term to its customers; a discount of ! if payment is received within 3 days upon delivery or the full amount must be paid after the 3th day. On the other hand for each day after the 8th day a delay penalty is charged; The firm’s objective is to maximize the cash available at the end of a one-year period after paying the annual inventory holding, ordering and crashing costs by proper selection of the decision variables that composes the Cash Conversion Cycle. In our model total Lead Time is deterministic whereas the Inventory Conversion Period depends on the Lead Times.

Lead Time 1 affects Reorder Point by changing the required safety stock level and demand during Lead Time; what is more, total Lead Time affects optimal ordering quantity by changing the crashing cost. Thus Inventory Conversion Period is a dependent variable in the model.

And since the receivable collection period is probabilistic, we are left with two decision variables; Total Lead Time and the Payment schedule. So our purpose is to find the optimal payment period and optimal total Lead Time, which gives the optimal CCC for the is more the manufacturer is following a similar reward-punishment mechanism regarding the retailer’s purchases; if the firm pays its debt within 10 days it gets a 1% discount but if it pays after 20th day it has to pay 2% more for each day passed after the 20th day. However as stated in Gupta and Dutta’s (2011) study, the optimal payment days within early or late payment periods are the last days of those periods since the company should keep the money in hand as long as possible given that the cash outflow is going to be the same. Thus, in our study we assume that the 35% of the customers are paying on the 3rd day (last day of the early period), and similarly 45% of the customers are paying on the 8th day (last day of the normal period) and for the late payments for practical purposes we assume that 20% of the customers are paying on the 10th then simulate a one year period by Monte Carlo Simulation over 100 iterations of the cash available at the end after deducting the annual inventory holding costs. All in all, our simulation results give us the average Collection Period, Optimal Lead Time Level and corresponding Inventory Conversion Period. Also the integer linear programming that we developed to minimize present value of accounts payable gives the optimal payment period. Thus, according to Formula 1 we find the optimal Cash Conversion Cycle for the firm by combining the optimal values of its results show that even if the CSL is changed, optimal Cash Conversion Cycle for the company remains 13 days. However the accumulated cash corresponding to the optimal CCC is changing. From the table it is seen that accumulated cash at the end of the one year period is maximized when the CSL is . This proves that trying to satisfy every customer doesn’t necessarily brings more money to firms. In order to increase the CSL the company has to increase safety stock level, which in turn increases the inventory holding cost. When the proceeds from satisfying customers are not enough to justify the corresponding inventory holding cost, company starts to lose money for each additional order it aims to fulfill. So from Table 7, it can be deduced that the optimal CSL for the manufacturer is when the other parameters are constant. However, even the accumulated cash is maximized when total Lead Time is 13, the difference between the maximum value and minimum value of the accumulated cash is very little; so Optimal Lead Time and accordingly the optimal CCC is not very sensitive to changes in CSL; so changing CSL from to 0 .90 (which is a big change) did very little change in the accumulated cash; so really the SS is not as significant in determining CCC or LT.

Cash Conversion Cycle is a comprehensive financial measurement that incorporates the financial and operative considerations of a business entity. Since it is the time period between payment to the suppliers and receipt of money from

the customers, it refers to days that the company needs outside financing. In that sense many researchers promote shorter Cash Conversion Cycle; however, our study, which uses project-scheduling techniques in shortening the CCC, shows that there is an optimal value for the CCC components, that the company is generating the best financial results. So the company should not push to shorten this optimal value at the expense of losing money. To reduce the CCC, a company can crash Lead Time, shorten collection period or prolong payable term. Nevertheless, all those there factors come with a price to company. While the receivable collection period is a function of company’s general operational policy and the customers’ financial considerations, in order to speed up collection, the company has to provide incentives to the customers. On the other hand, the payable term and inventory conversion period are completely under management incentive, provided that the cash is enough to make payments. However lead time crashing is a costly process and also delaying the payments to suppliers most of the time comes with a penalty. So the optimal points for these three components should be found which gives the company best financial results.

To sum up, although Cash Conversion Cycle is a comprehensive metric that the companies can use to evaluate their financial and operational policies, it makes more sense when it is calculated for consecutive time periods to see the change over time or when it is compared with several competitors. As different industries may have different practices regarding the receivable and payable contract terms, the optimal CCC will differ from industry to industry.

翻译：

财务管理的项目调度供应链(节选)

作者:Durukan Kalyoncu Guldane

接受日期:2012年6月

在文学,大量的出版物管理供应链存在的大部分都集中在物理方面的供应链。虽然底线是非常重要的经理,有数量有限的出版物,结合供应链的财务管理与实物管理。这些研究解决

供应链金融性能测量不同的方法和措施,其中之一是现金转换周期(CCC)。现金转换周期是一个指标,测量时间从供应商的付款直到收到客户的钱。因此它是一个二维的概念,同时包含了时间和财务方面的考虑。在这方面它使公司整合运营调度与金融调度。

当CCC的组件分别检查;平均应收应付和平均条款有关公司财务政策,合同条款之间的供应链合作伙伴。另一方面,库存转换周期取决于公司的库存政策。图1假设零售商的仓库的库存是在同一天顺序放置的制造商。也它假设没有出境运输时间当天,库存使零售商的仓库收到的客户和应收账款。根据这些假设存货转换周期取决于最优订购数量。

在这个意义上,CCC拥抱应付帐款、应收帐款和存货转换时期,前两个是与时间相关的现金流入和流出,第三是有关公司的业务政策,这是一个桥接测量之间的操作和财务规划。

也,因为CCC是现金流入现金流出的时间的流逝,它衡量公司需要多长时间外部融资。因此许多学者(法里斯和和记黄埔(2002),Soenen(1993),穆罕默德雇主和雇主穆罕默德萨阿德(2010)指出,较短的CCC公司财政状况就越好。然而,也有一些并发症有关的现金转换周期度量方法在金融管理供应链。尽管供应链合作伙伴把相当大的努力控制现金流入的流管理付款条件,这些现金流入主要是由于下游的球员不可预知的条件概率。另一方面,现金流出的上层链确定性;然而这取决于可用的现金。图2描述了“上游”和“下游”供应链合作伙伴。

上游合作伙伴下游合作伙伴供应商制造商分销商零售商客户。供应链水平从古普塔和杜塔的研究(2011),提前支付的债务导致当期最低现金流出,但它并不一定导致最低的现金流出的现值。因此有效地管理现金流不是一项容易的任务考虑概率流入除了立即付款债务之间的权衡,这减少了支付,逾期付款,增加现金存款的利息。那些金融因素变得更加复杂供应链周期长的。所以交货时间减少一个巨大的战略重要性为成功操作的链。然而,管理时间,主要是确定的,也不是一件容易的事,因为它以直接或间接方式影响现金流流。间接地减少提前期影响的现金流改善客户服务和响应需求的变化。首先,提前期压缩是一个昂贵的过程包括劳动力成本和额外的运输成本。其次,可以减少库存持有成本由于较低的安全库存要求。第三,减少交货时间减少现金转换周期。随着现金转换周期措施多久公司的现金和应付账和库存,直到完成订单;缩短交货时间减少借贷成本,同时它使公司更快交付产品或服务,因此,应收账款集合

期早些时候开始。虽然许多学者致力于等供应链提前期压缩比(1996)和Towill(1996)他们都忽略了投资成本需要实现前置时间的减少。也没有Beesley Towill触摸的借贷成本的问题,而是强调时间减少的间接金融影响,如快速响应市场,使一个更准确的需求预测。更重要的是,大部分的供应链金融建模的文章不考虑时间灵活性因素。众所周知,企业可以减少交货期来换取成本。因此,研究供应链金融方面的这种灵活性应该考虑。而Ben-Daya和Raouf(1994)的研究关注的是时间的灵活性问题通过研究交货时间减少的成本以及对库存策略的影响如订货点和最优订货量影响订购和库存持有成本,他们的研究并没有模型整体与上游供应链的交易球员都考虑进去。

总之,在文学缺乏一个全面的供应链的财务管理方法。今天也日益与静态模型动态公司无法管理。因此,预测集成模型,考虑到不稳定的金融市场,也能确保所需的流动性,同时提供及时和有效的应对订单是至关重要的。所以,目的是建立一个全面的方法,同时包含了时间和金钱方面的考虑,我们的研究使用现金转换周期作为决策变量对我们评估财务绩效。通过使用project-scheduling方法操作的时间和付款,我们的研究目的是找到最优现金转换周期产生最高累计现金的最后期限为一年。

然而,在我们的模型中现金流入是概率因此我们没有控制其影响最优CCC。结果值的一些改变为了找到最优CCC是订单数量,订货点和交货时间应付。所以我们的研究开始于分析影响供应链的财务管理的问题,然后介绍相关的模型是建立在以前的工作。在接下来的问题

影响了财务管理在SC进行了讨论。第三节回顾文献提出和第四节中给出的数学模型的目标最大化的累计净现金最后期限为一年。模型考虑现金流入和流出的时间和交货时间同时崩溃的成本。最后说明例子和灵敏度分析提出了紧随其后的是结论部分总结研究的结果。

牛鞭效应:这是最重要的供应链效率低下的原因之一。的放大需求方差的信息从较低层次的需求(客户)供应链的水平上(制造商)。可能严重破坏金融管理的供应链作为一个整体,特别是上部水平是影响最大的。每个合作伙伴,知道预测他们检索从较低的合作伙伴并不是百分之一百准确,建立安全库存。因此,订单上增加越来越多的安全库存水平是建立在系统中,导致上部层有一个印象,超过其实际水平的需求。所以交货期延长导致更高的安全库存水平进而导致更大的方式上的水平被称为牛鞭效应。需求预测:为使股票库存系统需求预测是生产管理的最重要的方面。随着周期的增加,预测得更远的时间,进而提高了预测错误。预测的准确性降低,企业被迫保持更多的安全库存,从而产生更高的库存持有成本。在硬币的另一面,即使一个公司决定保持低库存水平,在这样的环境中有高概率,它低于在应对客户订单这伤害了利润库存持有成本。因此,通过缩短供应链循环时间整个链得益于准确的需求预测。

借贷成本/投资:借贷成本是另一个重要方面的财务管理供应链。因为更多的利益被控在债务的发行日期时间,公司应该确保收款客户尽早以支付债务。显然,收集期间的主要决定因素是周期时间因为客户通常不愿意支付之前收到产品,除非提前提供一些激励措施如折扣。

库存持有成本:根据Ben-Daya和Raouf(1994)的经济订货批量(经济订购量)模型,随着时间增加,最优订货量Q *增加,因此该公司持有的平均库存一年,和相应的储存成本增加。除了物理库存持有成本,更高的报废成本与较高水平的库存应该考虑改变在技术或需求的新趋势。更重要的是,机会成本是库存控股的另一侧,资本与库存而不是其他赚钱的投资。交货时间崩溃成本:企业可以缩短所需的时间生产和交付产品

但这可以做客户的成本称为减少或崩溃。交货时间和崩溃的成本图负指数(递减函数)。崩溃过程始于最长的(处理)的时间对应于最低成本的活动,那么交货时间是减少成本成倍增加如图3所示。因此,总提前期可以分解为组件根据投资额减少/崩溃的时间。

现金,现金周期,首先定义Gitman(1974)进一步检查Gallinger(1997)时期的长度,该公司的营业周期需要昂贵的融资支持。他补充道,“你能想到的操作周期的天数销售库存和应收账款投资”(Gallinger,1997)。从Gallinger定义现金转换周期较长损害公司财务状况的借贷成本/融资所需的资金。因此,缩短CCC是公司财务管理的一个关键指标。在这个意义上,进一步分析的CCC Soenen(1993)分解成三个部分:

1。信用期限的长度,该公司从供应商获得,

2。生产过程的长度,

3。天最后产品的数量仍然在销售库存。

因此,在这项研究中我们将检查更换模具的时间减少的影响;换句话说缩短总提前期与最优时机的应收账款和应付款项财务管理供应链。除了减少CCC,提前期压缩有利于组织也在其它方面。Beesley(1996)指出,快速反应的想法在零售环境中,just-in -时间(JIT)在制造业领域两个重要的方面,减少时间起着至关重要的作用。在营销的价值是至关重要的说Beesley和补充道,随着企业变得越来越有竞争力,时间因素变得越来越重要。更重要的是,根据他的说法,结束以来消费者需求高各种选择,零售商今天应该持有最小的股票,以便他们可以最大化产品范围举行一个屋檐下,通过更快的补给也提供更好的服务。作者指出,尽管这些因素给企业的竞争优势,客户可能不愿意花更多的钱在速度和多样性。“时间压缩”的目的是减少业务流程所消耗的时间;因此将输入转化为输出的过程(生产时间)需要更短的时间内。从而实现时间压缩的关键是消除浪费时间和重新安排相应活动的顺序。然而Beesley 关注一个非常重要的事实,即物流策略时最有效的应用于供应链在其广泛的背景下,供应链

的范围是什么,将资源转化为交付,可消费的产品或服务。这就是所谓的“整体分析”或根据Beesley总系统视图。所以,根据他在他的论文“供应链中的时间压缩”,竞争力应该来自整个供应链系统,不仅从公司(生产商)本身。除了缩短交货时间提高现金转换周期的另一种方法是延长应付账款平均期限根据法里斯和和记黄埔(2002)。因为它是时间间隔的发行债务和现金流出,再支付条款使得公司能够获得无息融资。然而法里斯和和记黄埔省略了点球,制造商可能收费更长的付款期限,这将增加现金流出。更重要的是,当陈述的主要杠杆点管理CCC,他们强调减少应收账款的平均任期不过为了鼓励供应链的下游合作伙伴早付款,公司应该提供折扣,这反过来又降低了现金流入的数量。最后,减少总铅时间不是免费的公司。在这个意义上Nobanee(2009)在一种改进的建模方式的最优CCC供应链,他定义了最优CCC如下,见图1:最优现金转换周期=最优库存转换时期+最佳应收应付收集期间——最优延迟时间。每个组件从Nobanee方程式压缩到最短时间不一定会导致更好的财务业绩。最优分应该发现为每个组件的更换模具。现金转换周期措施多长时间以来公司的现金与履行订单,直到公司收到现金,缩短提前期影响最优现金转换周期和相应的财务管理供应链在两个方面:在我们的模型中,在三层供应链包括制造商、零售商和客户,我们正在调查金融影响的任何改变组件的现金转换周期的零售商。我们的零售商库存计划的预测需求的基础因此地方为了提前制造商通过经济订货批量(经济订购量)模型。应付账款的零售商问题放置订单给制造商。装船后发生的产品制造商的订单处理时间。所以需要订单处理时间以及零售商接受入站运输时间最初20天的物品在我们的模型中。

我们假设合同条款对应付账款和应收账款都是没有改变的期限为一年。在模型中收集来自客户的模式是概率,而支付给制造商的模式取决于收到客户付款。这种情况以确保现金足以支付当前的债务。零售商提供其客户的信用期限;的折扣如果收到付款后3天内交货或支付的全部金额必须在3日的一天。另一方面每天8天之后延迟惩罚被指控,该公司的目标是最大化可用的现金的支付年度库存持有一年时间后,订购和崩溃的成本通过适当选择的决策变量组成的现金转换周期。在我们的模型中总铅时间是确定的,而库存转换时期取决于交货期。交货时间1影响订货点通过改变交货时间期间所需的安全库存水平和需求,更重要的是,总提前期影响最优订购数量通过改变崩溃的成本。因此库存转换时期是一个因变量的模型。

由于应收账款收集期间是概率,我们只剩下两个决策变量;总交货时间和付款计划。所以我们的目的是找到最优付款时间和最优总提前期,使零售商的最优CCC。更重要的是制造商遵循类似的reward-punishment机制对零售商的购买;如果该公司支付其债务得到1%的折扣,但如果10天内支付后20天每天必须多支付2%后通过20天。然而如上所述在古普塔和杜塔(2011)的研究中,最优付款天早或晚付款周期内的最后几天时间自公司应该保持手头的钱尽可能考虑到现金流出将是相同的。因此,在我们的研究中我们假设35%的客户都是支付在第三天(早期的最后一天),和类似的45%的客户都是支付8天(正常时期的最后一天),用于支付实际末我们假设20%的客户都是支付第十天。然后模拟一年时间内通过蒙特卡洛模拟100次迭代结束时可用的现金扣除年度库存持有成本。总之,我们的仿真结果给我们的平均收集期间,最佳交货时间水平和相应的库存转换时期。整数线性规划,我们开发了以减少应付账款的现值为最优付款时间。因此,根据公式1我们找到最佳的现金转换周期的公司结合其组件的最佳值。结果表明,即使CSL改变,优化公司的现金转换周期仍然是13天。然而积累现金对应于最优CCC正在发生变化。从表中看到,积累现金的最后一年时间时最大化CSL是。这证明努力满足每一位客户并不一定给公司带来了更多的钱。为了增加CSL公司增加安全库存水平,从而增加了库存持有成本。当满足顾客所得不足以证明相应的库存持有成本,公司开始亏损为每个额外的订单它旨在满足。所以从表7,可以推断,制造商的最优CSL 当其他参数不变。然而,即使积累现金是最大化总铅时间13时,的最大值和最小值之间的差异累积的现

金很少,所以最佳的交货时间和相应的最优CCC在CSL的变化不是很敏感,所以改变CSL从到0。90(这是一个巨大的变化)很少变化积累现金,所以真正的党卫军没有重大决定CCC或LT。

现金转换周期是一个全面的金融测量,包含一个业务实体的金融和操作注意事项。因为它是支付给供应商和之间的时间从客户收到钱,它指天,公司需要外部融资。在这个意义上许多研究人员促进缩短现金转换周期;然而,我们的研究中,它使用project-scheduling技术缩短CCC,表明存在一个最优值CCC组件,该公司产生最好的财务业绩。所以公司不应该努力缩短这个最优值亏损为代价的。减少CCC,公司可以崩溃交货时间,缩短收集期间或延长支付期限。然而,所有这些因素与价格的公司。虽然公司的应收账款收集期间是一个函数的通用操作策略和客户的财务方面的考虑,为了加快集合,该公司为客户提供激励措施。另一方面,支付条款和库存转换时期完全管理下激励,提供足够的现金支付。但是交货时间是一个昂贵的过程,大部分时间也推迟支付供应商有一个点球。所以这三个组件的最佳点应该发现它给公司最好的财务结果。

总结,虽然现金转换周期是一个全面的指标,公司可以用它来评估他们的财务和运营政策,更有意义,当它计算出连续时间段查看随时间变化或与几个竞争对手相比时。不同的行业有不同的实践对于应收和应付合同条款,最优CCC将不同于工业行业。