Skip to main content
Log in

An optimal control model with defective products and goodwill damages

  • Short Note
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we formulate an optimal control model that considers the negative effect of product failures on goodwill. Differently from the models developed in the literature, we replicate Juran’s (Quality control handbook, McGraw Hill, New York, 1979) and Crosby’s (Quality is free, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1979) conformance quality models. Our findings suggest that a total quality management orientation should always consider an appraisal and prevention strategy to avoid the negative effect of defects on goodwill.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  • Akdeniz, M. B., & Calantone, R. J. (2015). A longitudinal examination of the impact of quality perception gap on brand performance in the US Automotive Industry. Marketing Letters, 28(1), 43–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aravindakshan, A., & Naik, P. A. (2011). How does awareness evolve when advertising stops? The role of memory. Marketing Letters, 22(3), 315–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, A. E., & Ho, Y. C. (1975). Applied optimal control, revised printing. Hemisphere, New York.

  • Chand, S., Moskowitz, H., Novak, A., Rekhi, I., & Sorger, G. (1996). Capacity allocation for dynamic process improvement with quality and demand considerations. Operations Research, 44(6), 964–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, P. B. (1979). Quality is free. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Giovanni, P. (2011). Quality improvement vs. advertising support: Which strategy works better for a manufacturer? European Journal of Operational Research, 208, 119–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Giovanni, P. (2013). Should a retailer support a quality improvements strategy? In Advances in dynamic games (pp. 125–148). Cham: Birkhäuser.

  • De Giovanni, P. (2018). A feature fatigue supply chain game with cooperative programs and ad-hoc facilitators. International Journal of Production Research, 8, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Giovanni, P., & Roselli, M. (2012). Overcoming the drawbacks of a revenue-sharing contract through a support program. Annals of Operations Research, 196(1), 201–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Giovanni, P., & Tramontana, F. (2016). A discrete model of conformance quality and advertising in supply chains. In International symposium on dynamic games and applications (pp. 199–216). Birkhäuser: Cham.

  • El Ouardighi, F., Jørgensen, S., & Pasin, F. (2008). A dynamic game of operations and marketing management in a Supply Chain. International Journal of Game Theory Review, 10, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El Ouardighi, F., Jørgensen, S., & Pasin, F. (2013). A dynamic game with monopolist manufacturer and price-competing duopolist retailers. OR Spectrum, 35, 1059–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El Ouardighi, F., & Kogan, K. (2013). Dynamic conformance and design quality in a supply chain: An assessment of contracts’ coordinating power. Annals of Operations Research, 211, 137–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El Ouardighi, F., & Pasin, F. (2006). Quality improvement and goodwill accumulation in a dynamic duopoly. European Journal of Operational Research, 175, 1021–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El Ouardighi, F., & Tapiero, C. (1998). Quality and the diffusion of innovations. European Journal of Operational Research, 106, 31–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fine, C. (1986). Quality improvement and learning in productive systems. Management Science, 32, 1301–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fine, C. (1988). A quality control model with learning effects. Operations Research, 36, 437–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, J. M. (1995). Estimating quality costs. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 46(6), 675–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, S., & Zaccour, G. (2004). Differential games in marketing, international series in quantitative marketing. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juran, J. M. (1979). Quality control handbook (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kogan, K., & Tapiero, C. (2007). Supply chain games: Operations management and risk evaluation., Springer Series in Operation Research New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, K. H., & Cheng, T. C. E. (2003). Initiatives and outcomes of quality management implementation across industries. Omega, 31(2), 141–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, G., Zhang, J., & Tang, W. (2015). Joint dynamic pricing and investment strategy for perishable foods with price-quality dependent demand. Annals of Operations Research, 226(1), 397–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajagopal, A. (2009). Buyer–supplier relationship and operational dynamics. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(3), 313–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tapiero, C. (1987). Production learning and quality control. IIE Transaction, 19, 362–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo, S. H., Shin, H., & Park, M. S. (2015). New product development and the effect of supplier involvement. Omega, 51, 107–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pietro De Giovanni.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

De Giovanni, P. An optimal control model with defective products and goodwill damages. Ann Oper Res 289, 419–430 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03176-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03176-4

Keywords

Navigation