Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate manufacturer encroachment and distributor encroachment in a three-echelon supply chain consisting of an upside manufacturer, an intermediate distributor and a downside retailer.Design/methodology/approachIn this paper, the authors use the optimization theory to mathematize the proposed question and build a model. First, the authors consider sequential quantity decisions, where the encroacher decides on the direct selling quantity after determining the retailer's order quantity. Second, the authors relax this sequential decision process assumption by reconsidering a circumstance in which quantity decisions are decided simultaneously.FindingsIn contrast to previous studies, this study shows that in three-echelon supply chains, the upside firm is more likely to encroach compared with the downside firm. The "bright side" of encroachment exists for all players only when the encroachment cost is at a moderate level. However, in manufacturer encroachment under simultaneous quantity decisions, the "bright side" skips the distributor but benefits the retailer directly as the encroachment cost increases from zero to a certain level. The main reason lies in that the distributor loses its pricing power because the end-market has been disturbed by the simultaneous quantity decisions. A comparison of the results of sequential and simultaneous quantity decisions reveals the merit of simultaneous quantity decisions. The authors find that the intermediate role (the distributor in our model) in three-echelon supply chains may benefit more from simultaneous quantity decisions. That is, the distributor may achieve a better profit even in a market with intensified competition.Originality/valueThe findings of this paper contribute to the marketing science literature on encroachment. The majority of existing literature has focused on manufacturer encroachment in two-echelon supply chains. This paper innovatively investigates and compares manufacturer encroachment and distributor encroachment in a three-echelon supply chain.

AbstractThis article shows that Walter Benjamin's initial characterization of the "sphere of moral relations" as divided by two mutually exclusive poles, law and justice, without a mediating third term such as "ethical life" or "moral education," generates the basis for his critique of violence. After describing how this characterization of moral relations both reproduces and inverts the underlying schema of Kant's Metaphysics of Morals, the article outlines the procedure whereby Benjamin's initial definition of violence as an "intervention" into moral relations is supplemented by a corresponding definition of legal "encroachment": law presents itself as a resolution or "expiation" of morally ambiguous relations; but insofar as the "sphere of moral relations" is split between the two poles of law and justice, such expiation conceals and thus intensifies the moral ambiguity of the situation on which law encroaches. The article concludes by suggesting that contemporary encroachments of law constitute a danger, akin to the growth of nihilism (in Nietzsche's sense), to which Benjamin's essay seeks to alert its readers.

AbstractProponents of zetetic encroachment claim that certain zetetic or inquiry-related considerations can have a bearing on the epistemic rationality of one's belief formation. Since facts about the interestingness or importance of a topic can be the right kind of reasons for inquisitive attitudes, such as curiosity, and inquisitive attitudes are ways to suspend judgement, these facts also amount to reasons against believing. This mechanism is said to explain several contentious phenomena in epistemology, such as the occurrence of pragmatic encroachment. In this paper, I provide two lines of reasoning against zetetic encroachment. First, on any contrastivist understanding of epistemic reasons, the case in favour of zetetic encroachment loses all its motivational force. Second, the thesis of zetetic encroachment is incompatible with the most promising way to understand degrees of inquisitive attitudes.