Production, Manufacturing and Logistics Competitive advantage through take-back of used products

By H. S. Heese, Kyle D. Cattani, Geraldo Ferrer, Wendell G. Gilland, Aleda V. Roth. 2005

245 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cea0a2012ec55c62cd6008d2b8cdb12e91446c02

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Competitive Quality Choice and Remanufacturing (2014, background): “…sells the new product (e.g., Esen-duran et al. 2010, Ferrer and Swaminathan 2010), an IR competing with an OEM (e.g., Esenduran et al. 2012, Ferrer and Swaminathan 2006, Majumder and Groenevelt 2001), or an OEM who faces competition from another ﬁrm (e.g., Atasu et al. 2008, Heese et al. 2005).”
Remanufacturing as a Marketing Strategy (2008, background): “Interestingly, all these articles mainly consider competition against local remanufacturers that use an OEM’s product returns for remanufacturing.”
A Metric for Quantifying Product‐Level Circularity (2017, background): “The shift to circular principles has been billed as a potential source for cost savings (Webster 2013; Stahel 2006; Heese et al. 2005; Giuntini and Gaudette 2003).”
Optimal Prices and Trade-in Rebates for Durable, Remanufacturable Products (2005, background): “Although the usefulness of trade-in rebates in acquisition of returned products has been acknowledged by some works (Klausner and Hendrickson 2000, Heese et al. 2001, TibbenLembke 2002), an explicit modeling attempt like ours has not been made (Guide and van Wassenhove 2001).”
Environmentally conscious manufacturing and product recovery (ECMPRO): A review of the state of the art. (2010, background): “Heese et al. (2005) analyze a three-stage game involving sequential decisions of two OEMs whether to takeback used products during the first two stages.”
Research advances in environmentally and socially sustainable operations (2012, background): “By examining the equilibrium outcomes of this three-stage game, Heese et al. (2005) showed that, by accepting the return of used product, the leader can deter its competitor from following suit especially when the leader has a higher market share of the new product or when the leader has a lower…”
Managing New and Remanufactured Products (2006, unknown): “Heese et al. (2005) determine a manufacturer’s incentive mechanism to develop a smoothly functioning secondary market based on a buyback contract with predetermined delivery.”
Designing the Business Models for Circular Economy—Towards the Conceptual Framework (2016, background): “[57]; Walsh [58]; Firnkorn & Muller [59]; Shafiee & Stec [60]”
Competition in remanufacturing and the effects of government subsidies (2008, background): “We assume that demand functions and costs are known by both firms (e.g., as in Majumder and Groenevelt, 2001; Debo et al., 2005; Ferguson and Toktay, 2005; Ferrer and Swaminathan, 2006; Heese et al., 2005; Webster and Mitra, 2007).”
Sharing Responsibility for Product Recovery Across the Supply Chain (2012, background): “Examples of voluntary efforts are discussed in Davis et al. (1997) and Fishbein (2000); in some cases, voluntary programs have been shown to be economically advantageous (Heese et al. 2005, Tof-fel 2004).”
Manufacturer-remanufacturing vs supplier-remanufacturing in a closed-loop supply chain (2016, background): “can be an effective marketing strategy for manufacturers to defend their market share and render a higher profit (Heese et al., 2005, Atasu et al., 2008b, Chen and Chang, 2013, Wu, 2015).”
Managing new and differentiated remanufactured products (2010, background): “…has seen important contributions in the study of supply-chain coordination (Corbett and Savaskan, 2002; Savaskan et al., 2004; Savaskan and Van Wassenhove, 2006), collection and leasing (Guide et al., 2003; Ray et al., 2005; Heese et al., 2005; Qu and Williams, 2008; Liang et al., 2009).”