0 views

Uploaded by Nelson Chacko

Seminar Report on Me

- 164
- lr_wms
- Fitness Share and Ni Ching Method
- Genetic algorithms
- Project Discover Generative Design Nagy Autodesk
- Designing safe, proﬁtable automated stock trading agents
- 14-oct11mohammadi
- 02R. the Oprtns Strategy and Competitiveness - Ud 22 Sep 2011
- fulltext (1)
- MOEAD
- Comp Here Sive
- 1-s2.0-S1359431108001294-main
- Auto Component Brochure
- THESIS ABSTRACT
- 496457.pdf
- 23-111-Final _ Identification and Evaluation of Risk Factors Affecting the Supply Chain Environment of Construction Industry of Khyber Pukht.pdf
- A hybrid Algorithm for Deployment of Sensors with Coverage and Connectivity Constraints
- Supply Chain Basics
- dnc
- Developing Green Purchasing Relationships for the Manufacturing Industry- An Evolutionary Game Theory Perspective (HIGHLIGHTS)

You are on page 1of 28

SINGLE OBJECTIVE AND WITH MULTIPLE

OBJECTIVES

A SEMINAR REPORT

submitted to

by

SARATH BABY

of

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY

in

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

KOTHAMANGALAM 686 666,

KERALA, INDIA.

NOVEMBER 2018

1

HEURISTIC APPROACHES TO DETERMINE BASE-

STOCK LEVELS IN A SERIAL SUPPLY CHAIN WITH A

SINGLE OBJECTIVE AND WITH MULTIPLE

OBJECTIVES

A SEMINAR REPORT

submitted to

by

SARATH BABY

of

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY

in

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

KERALA, INDIA.

NOVEMBER 2018

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, I thank Almighty God for bestowing me with his profound grace,

without which this seminar could not have been a success.

I sincerely thank the staff in charge of seminar for most valuable advices and support.

The encouragement given by my seminar guide helped me through the course of seminar.

Finally I express my heartfelt gratitude to my parents and my friends for the mental

support they had offered me and the immense encouragement to the successful completion

of the seminar.

3

CERTIFICATE

DETERMINE BASE-STOCK LEVELS IN ASERIAL SUPPLY CHAIN WITH A

SINGLE OBJECTIVE ANDWITH MULTIPLE OBJECTIVES” submitted by

SARATH BABY to the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, Kerala in partial

fulfillment for the award of Degree of Bachelor of Technology in Mechanical Engineering

is a bonafide record of the seminar carried out by him during the year 2018-2019.

Professor and Head of Prof. Sabu Kurian

Department of Mechanical Engineering Associate Professor

Department of

Mechanical Engineering

KOTHAMANGALAM 686 666

KERALA, INDIA.

4

ABSTRACT

This paper deals with the problem of determination of installation base-stock levels

in a serial supply chain. The problem is treated first as a single-objective inventory-cost

optimization problem, and subsequently as a multi-objective optimization problem by

considering two cost components, namely, holding costs and shortage costs. Variants of

genetic algorithms are proposed to determine the best base-stock levels in the single-

objective case. All variants, especially random-key gene-wise genetic algorithm

(RKGGA), show an excellent performance, in terms of convergence to the best base-stock

levels across a variety of supply chain settings, with minimum computational effort.

Heuristics to obtain base-stock levels are proposed, and heuristic solutions are introduced

in the initial population of the RKGGA to expedite the convergence of the genetic search

process. To deal with the multi-objective supply-chain inventory optimization problem, a

simple multi-objective genetic algorithm is proposed to obtain a set of non-dominated

solutions.

5

CONTENTS

Title Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................i

ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................ii

LIST OF TABLES..........................................................................................................iii

LIST OF FIGURES....................................................................................................... iv

ABBREVIATIONS..........................................................................................................v

NOMENCLATURE .......................................................................................................vi

CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………... 11

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF GA’S

ANALYSIS OF ALGORITHMS………………………………….. 20

CHAPTER 6 : SUMMARY………………………………………………………….. 25

REFERENCE…………………………………………………………………………. 26

6

LIST OF TABLES

1 Different supply chain cost rate and lead time settings ......................................................

18

19

With the consideration of TSCC-1......................................................................................

21

7

LIST OF FIGURES

4 Chromosome representation............................................................................... 14

5 Crossover operator.............................................................................................. 15

8

NOMENCLATURE

English Symbols

j Stage index

j,t

B Installation backlog at stage j , at the end of time t

j+1,j

TR Transportation cost between j+1 and j

Fk Fitness constant

u Random number

9

ABBREVIATIONS

GA Genetic algorithm

MR Mutation rate

CE Computational effort

CR Crossover rate

10

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

suppliers, manufacturers, warehouses and retailers, so that merchandise is produced and

distributed in right quantities, to the right locations and at the right time. Inventory in a

supply chain can be managed locally through installation stock policies or centrally using

echelon stock policies. Clark and Scarf used a recursive decomposition approach to

determine the optimal policies. The task of deploying a recursive decomposition to

determine or characterize the optimal echelon base-stock policy and to obtain the

associated inventory costs is not an easy task because the problem as well as the solution

technique, in general, is not easy to develop and is computationally hard (Clark, 1960;

Shang and Song, 2003). In the context of managing inventories in supply chains,

simulation is widely applied to study and evaluate the inventory policies. Reasons

attributed to the choice of simulation to analyze supply chain inventory decisions are the

ability of simulation technique for comprehensive modeling and the flexibility to

incorporate uncertainty and supply chain dynamics.

It is observed from the literature that the solution approaches developed to optimize

base-stock levels in supply chain include heuristic algorithms and iterative search

procedures. Determination of base-stock levels in a supply chain for every stage and the

minimization of the total supply chain cost are quite complex and computationally tedious.

Motivated by such observations and findings, the current study aims at developing

efficient simulation-based algorithms (such as genetic algorithms, gas) to determine the

best local base-stock levels in a serial supply chain.

11

CHAPTER 2

The supply chain model envisaged in the present study is a single-product, four-stage

serial supply chain consisting of a retailer, distributor, manufacturer and supplier. All the

members in the supply chain operate under a periodic-review base-stock policy, where the

review period is unit time (or a day). Order cost is assumed to be zero or negligible. The

retailer faces random customer demand. Lead time for information (or order processing) is

zero or negligible. Processing lead time and transportation lead time are combined

accordingly at each stage and considered together as one component, called installation or

local replenishment lead time for that stage. Base-stock level at every member or

installation in the supply chain takes discrete integer values. All installations have infinite

capacity. The source of supply of raw materials to the most upstream member, namely the

supplier, is assumed to have infinite raw material availability. Even though the

replenishment lead time is assumed to be deterministic, there exists supply uncertainty in

the sense that the customer or any member will be replenished, provided that the

immediate upstream member has sufficient on-hand inventory to meet the replenishment

order quantity; otherwise, a replenishment order is passed to the next upstream member

who in turn will satisfy the demand depending on the on-hand inventory. The

replenishment lead time for any member can vary between the respective replenishment

lead time and the maximum replenishment lead time that corresponds to the sum of all

replenishment lead times from that member up to all its upstream members in the supply

chain.

The supply chain model envisaged in this work is simulated to evaluate the

performance of the supply chain with respect to every base-stock policy (generated

through the various solution approaches considered in this study), with the total supply

chain cost (TSCC) as the measure of performance in the case of single objective supply

chain inventory problem. The supply chain is simulated for random customer demands

12

that are generated from different demand distributions (i.e., Uniform, Normal and Poisson)

for a specified long run length over which the statistic, TSCC, is collected.

TSCC across all members in the supply chain over T (a long run) is given as follows:

Figure 1

The objective is to obtain optimal installation base-stock policy, that minimizes the TSCC.

It is to be noted that in the current study, we consider the installation base-stock levels and

hence we define the total cost function accordingly. Since we allow backlog of unsatisfied

demand at every stage, the last two terms do not influence sj

Figure 2

We term the above TSCC as TSCC-I in this study. For the case where b j exists at every

stage, we have the TSCC, called TSCC-II in this study, as follows:

Figure 3

13

CHAPTER 3

of installation base-stock levels at different stages). The chromo-some length (l) is set

equal to the number of members (N), and a chromosome is represented in the following

manner:

Figure 4

levels randomly. An installation base-stock level s j is bounded by upper and lower limits,

i.e. sjUL and sjLL , computed as shown below

replenishment lead time with respect to member j)

replenishment lead time with respect to member j)

A set of installation base-stock levels sj are randomly generated within the range [sjUL ;

sJLL] for j = 1 to n, to form a chromosome. Thus n chromosomes are generated, constituting

the parent population, called par_pop. . Chromosomes in par_pop are evaluated through

simulation, and their respective objective function values (TSCC-1 or TSCC-2) are

14

obtained. For the sake of generality, let TSCC k correspond to objective-function value of

chromosome k. Fitness value fk is computed for the kth chromosome by setting, fk = 1/(1 +

TSCCk). Based on fk values, the chromosomes are selected probabilistically (i.e., roulette-

wheel selection) to the mating pool. The size of the mating pool is same as par_pop. A

single-point crossover operator is deployed.

Figure 5

The first two chromosomes in the mating pool are selected for crossover with a crossover

rate (i.e., probability of crossover) CR, by sampling a uniform random number u. These

chromosomes are directly placed in int_pop (an intermediate population), if u is >CR; else

the two chromosomes are subjected to crossover.

Offspring are placed in int_pop. Repeat the possible crossover operation on the rest of

the chromosomes in the mating pool by considering two consecutive chromosomes at a

time.

The mutation operator used in this study is a gene-wise mutation operator, with a gene

representing an installation base-stock level. Genes of offspring in the int_pop are mutated

with a probability of MR.

crossover operator, called gene-wise crossover operator, that makes use of the information

of genes of all chromosomes present in par_pop, and builds an offspring out of those

chromosomes.

15

Thus the generated offspring inherits four genes from the chromosomes in the

par_pop, based on chromosomes fitness values. Generate offspring in this manner until n

offspring are generated. It is to be noted that in this variant of GA with gene-wise

crossover operator, we do not generate a mating pool nor have we used the crossover rate.

We generate n offspring by constructing each offspring directly from par_pop through

gene-wise crossover operator. But for this mode of generation of offspring, all other steps

of the BGA hold for Variant 2

The genes for chromosomes are represented as random keys (or uniform random

numbers), instead of phenotypes, in RKGA. Random-key representation as a solution

representation was introduced by Bean (1994). A chromosome is represented as random

keys as follows:

Figure 6

where uj is the uniform random number or the random key that stands for the scaled base-

stock level at the jth member in a supply chain. The initial population is created by

generating uniform random numbers in the interval (0, 1), and filling up all the

chromosomes in par_pop. To evaluate the goodness of the chromosomes, chromosomes

are decoded to obtain the installation base-stock levels.

The crossover and mutation operations used in Variant 3 are the same as in the BGA,

but these operators operate on random keys. Every resultant chromosome in int_pop is

then decoded to get the base-stock levels at different stages (or installations). All other

steps in Variant 3 are the same as in BGA.

crossover are employed. Thus, this approach is a hybridization of Variant 2 (in terms of

gene-wise crossover) and Variant 3 (in terms of random-key representation). But for these

16

changes, this variant is same the BGA. Note that Variant 4, just like Variant 2, does not

create a mating pool.

CHAPTER 4

EVALUATION OF GA’S

A supply-chain setting consists of a cost-rate setting and a lead time setting (see Table

1). For example, the cost-rate setting CS1 and the lead time setting LT1 constitute one

supply chain setting. Two measures of performance, namely TSCC-1 and TSCC-2, are

considered separately. Accordingly, six supply chain settings are studied with respect to

TSCC-1, and six more supply chain settings are studied with the consideration of TSCC-2.

We have considered different holding cost-rates, shortage cost-rates and lead times in

order to check for the robustness of the proposed GAs in terms of their consistent and

good performance across various supply chain settings and scenario.

The run length for the simulation experiment is 1400 days, and each simulation

experiment is replicated 30 times by using 15 pairs of random numbers and antithetic

random numbers to sample customer demand. This method of antithetic sampling is a

commonly used procedure for generating negatively correlated pairs of samples (Deo,

1999). The customer demand is uniformly distributed in the range [20, 60] units per unit

time (i.e., per day). Customer demand is sampled from a uniform distribution because,

given the minimum and maximum values that a random variable can take, the variance is

maximum when the random variable follows the uniform distribution.

17

Table 1

The measure of performance is observed over a period of 1200 within the run length of

1400 days, by leaving out the first 100 and the last 100 days. At the end of 30 replications,

the mean and standard deviation of the measures of performance are computed. The

supply chain is simulated by initializing the on-hand inventory at the members equal to

their respective base-stock levels. A pilot study for determining the best parameter settings

in the proposed GAs has been carried out, and the best {CR,MR} settings are obtained for

the variants of GA with respect to TSCC-1 and TSCC-2. Having chosen the best

{CR,MR} settings for GAs (in the neighborhood of 0.85 and 0.15 respectively)

different installations (with each installation base-stock level bounded by the respective

sjUL and sjLL ), and evaluating every combination through simulation, we obtain the optimal

18

installation base-stock levels at different installations with respect to TSCC-1 and TSCC-2

for every supply chain setting (termed CEn.).

Table 2

supply chain settings. The base-stock levels and their corresponding mean and standard

deviation of TSCC (over 30 replications), total holding cost (THC), total holding cost as a

percentage of TSCC, total shortage cost (TSC), total shortage cost as a percentage of

TSCC and the percentage deviation of TSCC from the optimal solution for each of the

solution procedures (with respect to every supply chain setting) are obtained and some

sample results are tabulated in Table 2. Optimal solution for every supply chain setting is

obtained through a complete enumeration of the solution space. Note that all the four

19

variants of GAs have performed very well, and are capable of generating near-optimal

base-stock levels in all the supply chain settings, with the average percentage deviation of

TSCC from the respective optimal solution being very small. It is seen from Table 2 that

the percentage THC for CS1 + LT1 is 77.85%, whereas for CS2 + LT1 it is 86.69%, and

for setting CS3 + LT1 it is 88.14%. This holding-cost increase from one cost-rate setting to

another is mainly due to the increase in the shortage cost-rate across different supply chain

settings (see Table 1).

computational effort required by an algorithm (expressed in terms of the number of

solutions that an algorithm has enumerated to converge to the best solution). Tables 3 and

4 present the computational effort required by every solution procedure for each of the six

supply chain settings with respect to TSCC-1 and TSCC-2.

To get more insight from the data presented in Tables 3, the computational effort

values are normalized by dividing the computational effort required by every solution

procedure for a supply chain test problem by the minimum computational effort required

for that supply chain test problem. An average normalized computational effort (ANCE) is

calculated for each of the solution procedures. It is evident that the proposed GAs,

especially with the random-key representation and the gene-wise crossover operator,

require less computational effort.

on the best-move neighborhood local search), and found this search technique requiring a

lot more computational effort than the GAs. All these results are not given here for want of

space

levels with minimum computational effort in the case of both TSCC-1 and TSCC-2, it is

decided to further analyze its performance in order to test for its robustness by considering

different customer demand distributions that have their upper limits unbounded. The

performance of RKGGA is first analyzed with demand following normal distribution. The

20

parameters (mean and standard deviation) of the normal distribution are assumed to be 40

units per unit time and 7 units per unit time respectively.

Table 3

Following the earlier supply chain settings and simulation-based analyses, the

performance of RKGGA is found to be very good in this case as well, in terms of

obtaining near optimal base-stock levels. Next, by assuming the demand to follow Poisson

distribution, with the mean demand rate assumed to be 40 units per unit time, the

performance of RKGGA is evaluated. The performance of RKGGA is found to be very

good in this case as well.

21

The performance of RKGGA is analyzed with an alternative form of the problem by

assuming random replenishment lead times. In this phase of work we obtain the optimal

base-stock policy in the class of installation base-stock policies by using RKGGA with the

consideration of random replenishment lead times, although the base-stock policy need not

be necessarily be optimal. It is found that the RKGGA is able to converge to the best base-

stock policy in the class of base stock policies with minimal computational effort.

The performance of RKGGA (in these analyses) reinforces the fact that the RKGGA is

very robust, and is not sensitive to distributions, demand variance and alternative forms of

supply chain problems. In all the analyses RKGGA is able to unearth solutions with very

good quality, with the percentage deviation from the optimal solution being very marginal.

22

CHAPTER 5

Most real-life optimization problems involve multiple and conflicting objectives, and

different solutions may produce trade-offs among different objectives. There exist a set of

solutions which are Pareto-optimal, and at least one such solution dominates a solution not

contained in this set of non-dominated solutions. Since a number of solutions can be

Pareto-optimal, the task of multi-objective optimization is to find as many such (trade-off)

non-dominated solutions as possible, and this task is quite complex. The single-objective

problem considered so far (in terms of minimizing the TSCC) aims at finding the best

base-stock levels at various stages in a serial supply chain.

This research setting has served as the motivation to develop a MOGA-SCIP for

generating a set of non-dominated solutions (involving trade-off between total holding

cost and total shortage cost in the supply chain). Many multi-objective GAs have been

developed for optimizing continuous systems, and most existing multi-objective GAs are

quite complicated and they make use of many parameters.

Step 1: Generate 199 solutions with their installation base-stock levels set randomly

between the GAs base-stock level and the upper bound on the respective base-stock level

at every stage; the solution generated by the GA is also considered, and these 200

solutions together constitute the initial set of solutions (i.e., initial population).

Step 2: Evaluate all the chromosomes in the initial population via simulation and obtain

the values of their respective THC and TSC.

23

Step 5: Select one chromosome at random from the non-dominated set of solutions. As for

the second chromosome, sample u. If u 6 P, then choose a chromosome at random from the

non-dominated front; else generate randomly a solution within the respective bounds on

base-stock levels at different stages and compute its THC and TSC.

Step 6: Subject the two chromosomes obtained in Step 5 to gene-wise crossover operation.

Form one offspring by making use of fitness values computed with the consideration of

THC, and form another offspring by making use of the fitness values with the

consideration of TSC.

Step 7: Generate five neighborhood solutions from each of the two offspring.

Step 8: Evaluate the two offspring and the 10 neighborhood solutions by using simulation

and obtain the values of THC and TSC.

Step 9: Form a set of non-dominated solutions, out of the two offspring and 10

neighborhood solutions.

Step 10: Combine the non-dominated set obtained from Step 9 and the current set of non-

dominated solutions to form the net or updated non-dominated set.

Step 11: If T = 100, then go to Step 12; else increment T = T + 1 and return to Step 5.

Step 12: If P = 1.0, go to Step 13; else increment P by 0.10, set T = 1, and return to Step 5.

Step 13: Stop. The final non-dominated set of solutions is the solution set.

24

CHAPTER 6

SUMMARY

The present work has considered the problem of determination of base-stock levels in

a serial supply chain so as to minimize the TSCC (i.e., TSCC-1 or TSCC-2). Three new

variants of GAs are proposed, namely, GGA, RKGA and RKGGA. The proposed GAs are

evaluated with a variety of supply chain settings, and it is found that the proposed

RKGGA outperforms all other solution procedures. To expedite the convergence of the

genetic search process, problem-specific heuristic solutions are introduced in the initial

population. The performance analysis shows that the convergence of the genetic search

process has improved considerably after introducing the proposed heuristic solutions in the

initial population. More importantly, a multi-objective genetic algorithm has been

proposed to obtain non-dominated solutions in respect of total holding costs and total

shortage costs in a serial supply chain.

25

REFERENCES

Bean, J.C., 1994. Genetic algorithms and random keys for sequencing and optimization.

ORSA Journal on Computing 6, 154–160.

Clark, A.J., 1960. The use of simulation to evaluate a multiechelon dynamic inventory

model. Naval Research Logistics Quart 7, 429– 446. Clark, A., Scarf, H., 1960. Optimal

policies for a multi-echelon inventory problem. Management Science 6, 474–490.

Daniel, J.S.R., Rajendran, C., 2005. A simulation-based genetic algorithm for inventory

optimization in a serial supply chain. International Transactions in Operational Research

12, 101–127 (also, see Erratum 12, 479).

Chichester, UK.

Deb, K., Agrawal, S., Pratap, A., Meyarivan, T., 2000. A fast elitist non-dominated

sorting genetic algorithm for multi-objective optimization: NSGA-II. In: Proceedings of

the Parallel Problem Solving from Nature VI (PPSN-VI), pp. 849–858.

Deo, N., 1999. System Simulation with Digital Computer. Prentice-Hall of India Private

Limited, New Delhi.

Ettl, M., Feign, G.E., Lin, G.Y., Yao, D.D., 2000. A supply network model with base-

stock control and service requirements. Operations Research 48, 216–232.

Federgruen, A., Zipkin, P., 1984. Computational issues in an infinite horizon, multi-

echelon inventory model. Operations Research 32, 818–836.

Gallego, G., Zipkin, P., 1999. Stock positioning and performance estimation in serial

production-transportation systems. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management 1,

77–88.

Glasserman, P., Tayur, S., 1995. A sensitivity analysis for base-stock levels in multi-

echelon production-inventory systems. Management Science 41, 263–281.

26

Lee, H.L., Billington, C., 1993. Material management in decentralized supply chains.

Operations Research 41, 835–847.

Minner, S., 1997. Dynamic programming algorithms for multi-stage safety stock

optimization. OR Spektrum 19, 261–271.

Papoulis, A., 1985. Probability, Random Variables and Stochastic Processes. McGraw-

Hill, Singapore. Petrovic, D., Roy, R.,

environment. European Journal of Operational Research 109, 299–309.

Rao, U., Scheller-Wolf, A., Tayur, S., 2000. Development of a rapid-response supply

chain at Caterpillar. Operations Research 48, 189–204.

27

28

- 164Uploaded byieom2012
- lr_wmsUploaded byFernando Medinah Hdz
- Fitness Share and Ni Ching MethodUploaded byboss_84094533
- Genetic algorithmsUploaded bygo2_sumit
- Project Discover Generative Design Nagy AutodeskUploaded byVictor Okhoya
- Designing safe, proﬁtable automated stock trading agentsUploaded byhundredwaters7387
- 14-oct11mohammadiUploaded byClaudia Garnica Trujillo
- 02R. the Oprtns Strategy and Competitiveness - Ud 22 Sep 2011Uploaded bySidhant Bansal
- fulltext (1)Uploaded byleinadpm
- MOEADUploaded byYogesh Sharma
- Comp Here SiveUploaded byTiruchengode Vinoth
- 1-s2.0-S1359431108001294-mainUploaded byAmirhosein Rad
- Auto Component BrochureUploaded byMadhu Sundhar
- THESIS ABSTRACTUploaded bySooraj Narayan
- 496457.pdfUploaded byVape Nation
- 23-111-Final _ Identification and Evaluation of Risk Factors Affecting the Supply Chain Environment of Construction Industry of Khyber Pukht.pdfUploaded byabbas6063
- A hybrid Algorithm for Deployment of Sensors with Coverage and Connectivity ConstraintsUploaded byIJAERS JOURNAL
- Supply Chain BasicsUploaded byPiyush Chavan
- dncUploaded byJumi Kalita
- Developing Green Purchasing Relationships for the Manufacturing Industry- An Evolutionary Game Theory Perspective (HIGHLIGHTS)Uploaded byYasmin Magsipoc
- Applyingetomenhancedtelecomoperationsmapframeworktonon Telecommunicationsservicecompanies Anproductservicesolutioninnovationexample 111231094814 Phpapp01Uploaded bykartik
- Business BuyingUploaded byginish12
- Snapshot on Sustainable Supply ChainUploaded byAlanRichardson
- geetha2013.pdfUploaded byCésar
- Planning System for Indoor Wireless NetworkUploaded byShereen Lina
- The Capable Supply ChainUploaded byshailendrajits
- Brief Risks and Opportunities Paper Download GodlanUploaded byRohit Soni
- Supply Chain TalentUploaded byDiego Fernando Zambrano Jiménez
- 04-V4N2-FullUploaded bySraboni Ghosh
- Liberatore Chap OneUploaded bySheri Dean

- htrqbcUploaded byimap.in
- UPS_CaseUploaded byJaideep Singh
- NIPP Performance Report 2009 FINAL Aug 2010Uploaded byWhistleblowers Sa
- 119. Dissertation_Impacts of Lean Supply Chain Customs in ChinaUploaded byVU ThuyDung
- Productguide Us Issuu FinalUploaded byKhoi Pham
- Digi Code of Conduct 2012Uploaded byanlekgen
- Designing the Green Supply ChainUploaded bydjolisimo
- The Bullwhip EffectUploaded byvaibhavb41
- logisticsUploaded bySilviu Necula
- Broadway CaseUploaded byIsha S. Sehgal
- Nike Case Study Analysisv2Uploaded byHelioSunPOWR
- Strategy - Resources of a BusinessUploaded byP Venkatesan
- Canned Pineapple IndoUploaded byCindy Orange
- S4HANA Whitepaper v2.6Uploaded byPradeep Narkhede
- ppt scmUploaded byAnu Uy
- Toyota.docUploaded byAfaque Ahmed Balouch
- CV of Rifat 26 Nov 2014Uploaded bysjkda
- Ecommerce noteUploaded byAgni Dev
- FacLocUploaded byandi royhan alby
- K&N'sUploaded byMarwah Yaseen
- Business Savvy Giving HR the EdgeUploaded byPankaj Khatoniar
- Indian Oil Corporation Business Analysys.Uploaded bypp7793
- Automatska Identifikacija i Optimizacija - Doktorska Disertacija VELIBOR JOVANOVICUploaded byHokusy
- Indian Business EnvironmentUploaded byPradeep Tomar
- sistemul APQPUploaded byIonut Eduard
- FREE Chapter Designing and Managing the Supply ChainUploaded byGökay Yayla
- Indian Retail Industry_ Challenges, Opportunities and Outlook - OverviewUploaded byHitesh Pant
- SM WAL-MART GROUP 3Uploaded byKennedy Ng
- Paradise Lost: The lost promise of e-commerce | MHD September-October 2018Uploaded byRaymon Krishnan
- CIO VP Director IT in Dallas TX Resume Robert VerretUploaded byRobertVerret