Min, W and Pheng, L S (2005) Economic order quantity (EOQ) versus just-in-time (JIT) purchasing: An alternative analysis in the ready-mixed concrete industry. Construction Management and Economics, 23(4), pp. 409-422. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The literature on the use of just-in-time (JIT) and economic order quantity (EOQ) purchasing has increasingly favoured JIT in recent years, especially when firms are purchasing to meet high and consistent levels of demand, and the JIT operation can take advantage of inventory physical plant space reduction. The theoretical advantages of JIT purchasing may have been overstated. Two new concepts are developed to underpin the idea that, even if the JIT approach can induce inventory physical plant space reduction, it is possible for EOQ to be more cost effective, as the inventory demand approaches the break-even point between the function of the annual holding capacity of an inventory facility and the function of the EOQ-JIT cost indifference point. The survey and case study conducted in the ready-mixed concrete industry in Singapore support this proposition.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | break-even point; cost indifference point; eoq; holding capacity; inventory facility; jit |
| Index terms: | just-in-time, survey, economic order, concrete industry, purchasing, inventory, Singapore, case study |
| Subjects: | lean logistics, industry analysis, procurement strategy, Geography, inventory management, data collection methods, economic and policy analysis |
| Topics: | Supply Chain Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here