Hubbry Logo
Vendor-managed inventoryVendor-managed inventoryMain
Open search
Vendor-managed inventory
Community hub
Vendor-managed inventory
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Vendor-managed inventory
Vendor-managed inventory
Vendor-managed inventory
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Vendor-managed inventory (VMI) is an inventory management practice in which a supplier of goods, usually the manufacturer, is responsible for optimizing the inventory held by a distributor.

Under VMI, the retailer shares their inventory data with a vendor (sometimes called supplier) such that the vendor is the decision-maker who determines the order size, whereas in traditional inventory management, the retailer (sometimes called distributor or buyer) makes his or her own decisions regarding the order size. Thus, the vendor is responsible for the retailer's ordering cost, while the retailer usually acquires ownership of the stock and has to pay for their own holding cost. One supply chain management glossary identifies VMI as

The practice of retailers making suppliers responsible for determining order size and timing, usually based on receipt of retail POS and inventory data.[1]

although a 2008 article notes that there is no standard definition of VMI and the term's usage varies "significantly" among companies supporting VMI processes.[2]

A third-party logistics provider may also be involved to help ensure that the buyer has the required level of inventory by adjusting the demand and supply gaps.[3]

Overview

[edit]

One of the keys to making VMI work is shared risk. In some cases, if the inventory does not sell, the vendor (supplier) will repurchase the product from the buyer (retailer). In other cases, the product may be in the possession of the retailer but is not owned by the retailer until the sale takes place, meaning that the retailer simply houses (and assists with the sale of) the product in exchange for a predetermined commission or profit (sometimes referred to as consignment stock). A special form of this commission business is scan-based trading, where VMI is usually applied but its use is not mandatory.[4]

This is one of the successful business models used by Walmart, Procter & Gamble[5] and many other big box retailers.[6] Oil companies often use technology to manage the gasoline inventories at the service stations that they supply (see Petrolsoft Corporation). Home Depot uses the technique with larger suppliers of manufactured goods. VMI helps foster a closer understanding between the supplier and manufacturer by using electronic data interchange formats, EDI software and statistical methodologies to forecast and maintain correct inventory in the supply chain.

Vendors benefit from more control of displays and more customer contact for their employees; retailers benefit from reduced risk, better store staff knowledge (which builds brand loyalty for both the vendor and the retailer), and reduced display maintenance outlays.

Usage of VMI can prevent stocking undesired inventories and hence can lead to an overall cost reduction. Moreover, the magnitude of the bullwhip effect is also reduced by employing the VMI approach in a buyer-supplier cooperation.[7]

Consumers benefit from knowledgeable store staff who are in frequent and familiar contact with manufacturer (vendor) representatives when parts or service are required. Store staff have good knowledge of most product lines offered by the entire range of vendors. They can help the consumer choose from competing products for items most suited to them and offer service support being offered by the store.

At the goods manufacturing level, VMI helps prevent overflowing warehouses or shortages, as well as costly labor, purchasing and accounting. With VMI, businesses maintain a proper inventory, and optimized inventory leads to easy access and fast processing with reduced labor costs.[8]

Variant models include "consigned VMI", where the supplier or manufacturer retains ownership, and "dynamic VMI", where the buffer inventory remains located with the supplier, which can be beneficial if the supplier and retailer are located close enough together, and allows for buffer stock to be shared among distributors.[2]

As a symbiotic business relationship, VMI makes it less likely that a business will unintentionally run out of stock of a good and reduces inventory in the supply chain. Furthermore, vendor (supplier) representatives in a store benefit the vendor by ensuring the product is properly displayed and store staff are familiar with the features of the product line, all these while helping to clean and organize their product lines for the store. However, high-tech sector research undertaken in 2003 concluded that under VMI, "sizeable inventory burdens [are transferred] from the customer to the supplier" and that "significant additional operating expenses for the supplier" therefore arise.[9]

Components

[edit]

1. Inventory location

In VMI practice, inventory location depends on the arrangement between the vendor and the customer. The first option is for the inventory to be located both at the customer's and the supplier's premises. For the supplier, this serves as a safeguard against short delivery cycles or unsynchronized production cycles.[10] On the other hand, this arrangement can also lead to higher inventory holding costs because of the need for storage of the material, its tracking and handling, and the threat of inventory obsolescence.[11]

Another option can be for the vendor to deliver to the customer's central warehouse or alternatively, to a third party's warehouse. The latter can be a solution for buyers that have outsourced part or all of their logistics operations. Managing the inventory at the central warehouse enables better optimization of deliveries, lower costs and ultimately enables the buyer to maximize economies of scale.[11] However, it is not always an option, so third-party warehouses are often the solution to many different problems such as the supplier's warehouse being too far away from the buyer's or the buyer's inexperience in storing particular types of goods that are harder to store.[10]

The inventory can also be located directly at the buyer's premises such as the buyer's on-site warehouse, production line or the shop floor itself.[11] However, replenishing inventory levels at these specific locations can be more costly, less organized and overall more difficult to manage for the supplier.[10]

2. Inventory Ownership

Inventory ownership refers to the ownership of the inventory and when the invoice is being issued to the retailer. In vendor managed inventory, there is a number of solutions in terms of payment and transfer of ownership.[11]

In the first alternative, the vendor is the owner of inventory at the premises of the customer. Invoice is issued when the items are issued from the stock. In the second alternative, the retailer assumes ownership of the inventory, but receives an invoice upon delivery. However, the vendor is not paid until the customer issues the items from stock and within a delay according to agreed terms of payment.[11] This enables risk-sharing between both parties, as the retailer carries risk of obsolescence while the vendor would have been accountable for capital costs and fluctuation in prices of the inventory.[10]

In the third alternative, also referred to as a standard process in traditional order delivery, the retailer owns the inventory upon delivery, while the vendor invoices the retailer once the shipment has been made.[11] In this setting, retailer is responsible for inventory investment and holding costs, but has an option of protecting themselves against price fluctuations.[10]

3. Level of Demand Visibility

These elements refer to the type of demand information shared by customers to assist the suppliers in controlling their inventory. Many types of demand information are shared in the VMI Program. The demand information that are visible to the supplier are: sales data, stock withdrawal, production schedule, inventory level, goods in transit, back order, incoming order and return. It is argued that sharing data and inventory can improve the supplier’s production planning, make it more stable and increase its visibility. It also provides a better understanding of the seasonal changes, and helps to figure out critical times. The supplier can therefore take advantage of this information and adapt its production to the customers’ requests, and respond faster. With the increasing visibility of information, the supplier has a longer timeframe for replenishment arrangement.[12] The supplier also gets real time visibility, which allows him to have a hand on the inventory for the buyer demand forecast, which allows for projecting inventory based on future demand to target his inventory (minimize or maximize it).[13] This stability and coordination allows to reduce the bullwhip effect,[14] as the manufacturer has a clearer visibility on the supply chain and an overview of the incoming demand.[15] On the retailer’s side, all the costs associated with inventory management, (holding costs, shortage costs, spoilage costs, etc.) are greatly reduced. E.g., the retailer will rarely face stock shortage and holding costs are kept at a minimum since just enough inventory is held.[16]

Data is usually updated every week and is transmitted through an EDI, which allows forecasting actual market trends. The data is based on real quantities of produced and sold items. This agreement to share information is aimed at maintaining a steady flow of necessary goods.

Classes of mathematical model

[edit]

1. Bi-Level VMI Mathematical Models

The first class of VMI, bi-level VMI mathematical model, includes two levels (or echelons) in a supply chain: vendor and retailer. There are three types of VMI mathematical models developed from this class, which are single-vendor single-retailer VMI model,[17] single-vendor multi-retailer VMI model,[18] and multi-vendor multi-retailer VMI model.[19] This class has been significantly developing. For example, single-vendor single-retailer VMI model was extended for multi-product case,[20] the consignment stock (CS),[21] and discount.[7]

2. Multi-Level VMI Mathematical Models

The second class is a multi-level VMI mathematical model such as a single manufacturer-single vendor multi-retailer (SM-SV-MR) VMI model.[22] Those studies [which] fail to model replenishment frequencies cannot be classified here.[clarification needed]

Replenishment frequencies play an important role in integrated inventory models to reduce the total supply chain cost, but it has been noted that many studies fail to model it in mathematical problems.[22]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Vendor-managed inventory

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Vendor-managed inventory (VMI) is a collaborative practice in which the supplier assumes responsibility for monitoring and replenishing the buyer's levels, often based on shared such as point-of-sale information and status, to optimize while minimizing holding costs. In this model, the vendor determines order quantities and timing within predefined lower and upper limits, sometimes retaining of the until consumption, as in vendor-managed consignment inventory (VMCI). This approach shifts management decisions from the buyer to the supplier, enhancing coordination across the . VMI originated in the late through pioneering partnerships in the retail sector, notably between and in the United States, where suppliers gained direct access to retailer sales data to improve replenishment efficiency. This initiative addressed common inefficiencies like stockouts and excess by fostering greater and trust between partners. Since its inception, VMI has been adopted widely across industries, including and pharmaceuticals, evolving to incorporate technologies like for real-time tracking and risk mitigation. Key benefits of VMI include reduced overall costs for buyers—potentially by 4-6%—through better and autonomous supplier replenishments, alongside improved service levels and against disruptions. Suppliers benefit from increased demand visibility and streamlined operations, while the model promotes by minimizing waste from overstocking. However, successful requires tailored strategies, such as classifying suppliers by performance (e.g., reliable vs. unreliable) and using data analytics to set boundaries, as demonstrated in high-tech case studies.

Definition and Fundamentals

Definition

Vendor-managed inventory (VMI) is a collaborative strategy in which the or supplier assumes primary responsibility for monitoring and replenishing the levels of at the customer's , such as a retailer's or store. This approach enables the to make autonomous decisions on order quantities, shipping schedules, and timing based on shared information, including point-of-sale (POS) data, current records, and consumption patterns. In contrast to traditional inventory management models, where the buyer independently forecasts , places orders, and maintains stock levels, VMI shifts these tasks to the , reducing the buyer's administrative burden and intervention in routine replenishment. This fosters a dynamic, with the gaining direct access to real-time buyer data through mechanisms like (EDI), allowing for more accurate and responsive supply adjustments. A fundamental aspect of VMI involves shared risks and rewards between the vendor and buyer, as the vendor's performance in maintaining optimal stock directly impacts both parties' and costs. At its core, VMI emphasizes continuous replenishment processes, where frequent monitoring and automated deliveries aim to balance to prevent stockouts while avoiding excess holdings.

Key Principles

Vendor-managed inventory (VMI) can be integrated with collaborative planning, , and replenishment (CPFR) to enable vendors to leverage buyer-provided data for accurate and efficient delivery scheduling. In this approach, vendors access real-time sales and information from buyers to generate replenishment orders, fostering synchronized activities and reducing discrepancies between planned and actual . This integration extends VMI's scope by incorporating joint efforts, where both parties contribute insights to enhance prediction accuracy and streamline replenishment processes. A core principle of VMI is the reduction of the through enhanced information flow, which stabilizes demand variability across the . The arises from amplified demand signals upstream due to factors like order batching, price promotions, and errors; VMI mitigates this by providing vendors with direct visibility into downstream demand, eliminating practices such as and gaming while minimizing batching and promotion-induced fluctuations. This improved coordination allows for smoother adjustments, preventing excessive stockpiling or shortages that exacerbate variability in traditional s. VMI emphasizes trust-based partnerships between vendors and buyers, supported by formal contracts that define performance metrics such as fill rates and turns to ensure accountability and shared goals. These contracts often include mechanisms for and benefit , promoting long-term over short-term and addressing principal-agent challenges through mutual monitoring and aligned objectives. Trust serves as the foundation, enabling open data exchange and joint , which are essential for VMI's success in integrated . VMI encompasses variants tailored to specific operational needs, including consignment VMI, where the vendor retains of until it is consumed or sold by the buyer, thereby shifting holding costs and risks upstream. In models, vendors manage stock levels at the buyer's site but delay transfer, incentivizing efficient replenishment while maintaining financial control. Another variant is dynamic VMI, which incorporates real-time adjustments to policies based on fluctuating demand signals, allowing for adaptive responses to market changes without fixed reorder parameters. These variants enhance flexibility, with focusing on ownership deferral and dynamic approaches emphasizing responsive control.

Historical Development

Origins in the 1980s

The concept of vendor-managed inventory (VMI) emerged as an extension of just-in-time (JIT) manufacturing practices pioneered by in the 1970s and refined through the , which emphasized minimizing inventory waste and synchronizing supply with demand via the system. 's approach, developed by , shifted supply chain dynamics toward collaborative replenishment to avoid overstocking, influencing Western industries to adopt similar efficiency-driven models beyond internal production. This foundational JIT philosophy laid the groundwork for VMI by promoting vendor involvement in inventory control to achieve real-time responsiveness. A pivotal milestone occurred in 1985 when (P&G) and established the first major VMI partnership, focusing on diaper replenishment to enable P&G to monitor and manage stock levels at stores using (EDI). This collaboration, initiated by P&G sales vice president Lou Pritchard and founder , marked a departure from traditional buyer-led ordering, placing replenishment responsibility on the vendor while improving on-time deliveries and for both parties. The partnership demonstrated VMI's potential to streamline shelf-level control in retail, setting a precedent for broader adoption. In the early , VMI gained further traction through the Efficient Consumer Response (ECR) initiatives in the U.S. grocery sector, which aimed to address chronic out-of-stock issues—estimated at 8% of sales lost due to stockouts—by fostering collaborative practices like continuous replenishment. ECR, driven by industry leaders responding to competitive pressures from alternative retail formats, promoted VMI as a core strategy to enhance demand visibility and reduce inefficiencies without increasing costs. These efforts built on the Walmart-P&G model to encourage data-driven vendor oversight in perishable and high-volume grocery environments. Early VMI implementations in the faced significant hurdles, particularly resistance to stemming from competitive concerns over revealing sales and inventory details to vendors. Retailers and suppliers alike hesitated due to fears of losing negotiating power or exposing proprietary information, requiring substantial trust-building efforts as seen in the Walmart-P&G alliance. Despite these obstacles, overcoming such barriers through contractual agreements and technology like EDI proved essential for VMI's viability.

Evolution and Adoption

Following the foundational pilots of the 1980s, such as the Procter & Gamble-Walmart collaboration, vendor-managed inventory (VMI) experienced significant expansion in the 1990s through the Efficient Consumer Response (ECR) initiative in the U.S. grocery sector, which emphasized collaborative inventory practices to streamline s and reduce costs. The ECR framework, launched in 1992, integrated VMI as a core strategy for demand visibility and replenishment efficiency, fostering trust and information sharing among retailers and suppliers. Complementing this, the Voluntary Interindustry Commerce Standards (VICS) association, established in 1986, developed standardized guidelines that accelerated VMI adoption across U.S. retail industries, leading to broader implementation in grocery and goods sectors by the decade's end. Early international adoption followed, with ECR-inspired VMI initiatives emerging in by the mid-1990s to address similar inefficiencies. In the 2000s, VMI extended beyond retail into and healthcare, where it addressed complex supply needs through standardized (EDI) protocols that enabled seamless data flows between vendors and buyers. In , VMI models were applied to coordinate upstream and downstream networks, reducing lead times and inventory holding costs for small and medium-sized suppliers. Healthcare adoption grew notably, with hospitals implementing VMI for pharmaceutical supplies to optimize stock levels and minimize shortages, supported by EDI tools that automated order processing and inventory monitoring. The and marked an acceleration in VMI , propelled by the rise of and the imperative for amid disruptions like the , which highlighted vulnerabilities in traditional inventory models. Post-pandemic, VMI frameworks were positioned to enhance visibility and adaptability, with digital solutions integrating to mitigate risks in global networks. In U.S. retail, has surged, evidenced by a 42% increase in cloud-based VMI implementations over the past three years, contributing to North America's 38% share of the global VMI market in 2024. Globally, adoption trends reflect regional priorities: in , VMI has been driven by sustainability objectives under the EU Green Deal, promoting reduced waste and lower carbon emissions through optimized inventory practices. In Asia, manufacturing hubs like have integrated VMI with Industry 4.0 technologies, supported by government initiatives for that leverage IoT and analytics for efficient supply coordination. This integration has fueled rapid growth in the region, where VMI adoption focuses on cost reduction and enhanced supplier collaboration.

Core Components

Inventory Ownership and Location

In vendor-managed inventory (VMI) systems, ownership models primarily fall into two categories: vendor-owned and buyer-owned arrangements. Under vendor-owned models, often implemented through agreements, the supplier retains legal title to the until it is consumed or sold by the buyer, thereby assuming the of unsold goods, , or damage during storage at the buyer's site. In contrast, buyer-owned models transfer ownership to the buyer immediately upon delivery to the buyer's premises, shifting the risk of holding costs, spoilage, or loss to the buyer while the vendor handles replenishment decisions based on shared data. Inventory location in VMI is typically determined by the need for proximity to consumption points to minimize lead times and stockouts, with two main configurations: on-site at the buyer's facilities or centralized at the 's warehouses. On-site locations involve the stocking and managing directly at the buyer's premises, such as retail backrooms, floors, or point-of-use areas, which facilitates real-time monitoring and reduces transportation needs but requires space allocation and access rights from the buyer. Centralized locations at or third-party warehouses allow the supplier to maintain control over bulk before periodic deliveries to the buyer, offering in storage and handling but potentially increasing delivery frequencies and coordination. Legal and contractual implications in VMI hinge on the defined model, particularly regarding liability for risks such as , damage, or . In consignment-based vendor-owned models, contracts must specify the vendor's liability for goods while they are physically at the buyer's site, including obligations and mechanisms, as the buyer acts as a bailee without . For buyer-owned models, agreements delineate the point of transfer, often upon receipt, and include clauses on periods, rejection , and penalties for discrepancies to protect both parties from unforeseen losses. These contracts also address jurisdictional issues, especially in international VMI setups, where affects duties, taxes, and compliance. Hybrid ownership models in VMI combine elements of both approaches, with title transferring based on predefined milestones such as the point of consumption or a specified time period post-delivery. For instance, may remain vendor-owned during storage at the buyer's site but shift to buyer upon withdrawal for use, balancing risk allocation while enabling vendor oversight through visibility. Such models require precise contractual language to define triggers for change, ensuring clarity on liability transitions and supporting seamless .

Data Sharing and Demand Visibility

In vendor-managed inventory (VMI) systems, the buyer shares critical data with the supplier to enable effective replenishment decisions. Key types of shared data include real-time or near-real-time point-of-sale (POS) sales data, which provides insights into actual consumer demand; current inventory levels at the buyer's location; promotional calendars outlining planned sales events that influence demand spikes; and demand forecasts projecting future needs based on historical trends and market factors. Data in VMI can vary to balance collaborative benefits with concerns. Full grants the supplier unrestricted access to granular , such as individual transaction details and exact quantities, fostering precise and . In contrast, limited restricts access to aggregated , like summarized sales trends or average ranges, to protect sensitive while still supporting basic replenishment . Secure and automated data transfer is facilitated through established standards to ensure reliability and efficiency. (EDI) is widely used for structured, standardized exchange of documents like inventory reports and orders, reducing errors in VMI partnerships. Complementary formats such as XML enable flexible, human-readable data sharing, while integrations support real-time, direct connections between systems for dynamic updates. This data sharing underpins vendor-led replenishment cycles, allowing suppliers to monitor consumption and adjust deliveries proactively. Cycles are typically weekly for stable demand patterns, using aggregated POS and data for , or daily for high-velocity items where real-time accuracy minimizes stockouts and overstock. Accurate, timely data enhances forecast reliability, enabling vendors to align shipments with actual needs and optimize flow.

Benefits and Challenges

Advantages for Stakeholders

Vendor-managed inventory (VMI) offers distinct advantages to buyers by minimizing their operational burdens and financial exposures. Buyers experience reduced inventory holding costs, often achieving savings of 15-30% through optimized levels and decreased need for excess , as suppliers assume responsibility for replenishment based on . This shift also leads to fewer stockouts, with service levels improving from approximately 94% to 96% in simulated models, enabling fill rates exceeding 95% in practice. Consequently, buyers free up capital previously tied in , allowing reallocation to activities such as product development or market expansion. For vendors, VMI enhances and market positioning by providing direct access to buyer demand data, which improves accuracy and reduces risks by 15-25% through better synchronization of production and delivery schedules. This visibility mitigates the , leading to more stable capacity utilization and long-term profit increases via higher purchase volumes from buyers. Additionally, VMI fosters stronger buyer relationships through reliable service delivery, often resulting in 22% higher sales volumes as vendors demonstrate consistent performance. In contexts, these dynamics contribute to indirect material cost reductions of up to 25%, as streamlined replenishment minimizes and excess . Across the broader , VMI drives systemic efficiencies, including total cost reductions of 10-25% in through consolidated shipments and optimized transport routes that lower fuel consumption and emissions, thereby enhancing . improves as shared visibility enables quicker responses to disruptions, such as demand fluctuations or supply shortages, reducing overall vulnerability. Empirical studies confirm average reductions of 13-22% and out-of-stock incidents by 24%, amplifying chain-wide performance without increasing total system costs.

Potential Drawbacks and Risks

One significant drawback of (VMI) is the loss of control for buyers over inventory decisions, as suppliers assume responsibility for monitoring stock levels and ordering replenishments based on shared data. This shift can lead to mismatches between vendor priorities—such as minimizing their own holding costs—and the buyer's needs for optimal product assortment or rapid response to demand changes. For instance, buyers may find it difficult to influence replenishment timing or quantities if the vendor's forecasting emphasizes efficiency over flexibility, potentially resulting in overstocking of slow-moving items or stockouts of high-demand products. Data security risks pose another critical concern in VMI arrangements, particularly with the sharing of sensitive point-of-sale (POS) and data required for effective oversight. Such data exchanges increase to breaches, unauthorized access, or misuse, where competitors or malicious actors could exploit the information to gain market insights or disrupt operations. Compliance with regulations like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) adds complexity, as organizations must ensure lawful processing of in shared systems while addressing risks such as attacks or conflicts with rights. VMI also fosters dependency on vendor reliability, heightening risks from supplier failures or inaccuracies in that can cascade into disruptions. If a vendor experiences operational issues, such as production delays or financial instability, the buyer may face prolonged stockouts without alternative sourcing options readily available, especially under long-term contracts that limit flexibility. Poor by the vendor, often reliant on historical data, can exacerbate these issues during volatile market conditions, leading to inefficient levels and increased costs for the buyer. Implementation of VMI encounters hurdles including high initial setup costs and cultural resistance to collaborative models. Setup expenses, encompassing for , employee training, and process redesign, can be substantial, often requiring investments equivalent to a notable portion of annual value to establish secure systems and workflows. Additionally, organizational resistance arises from reluctance to relinquish traditional control, stemming from trust deficits or ingrained siloed operations, which can delay and amplify early-stage inefficiencies.

Implementation Process

Steps for Successful Implementation

Implementing vendor-managed inventory (VMI) requires a systematic approach to ensure alignment with organizational goals and minimize disruptions in the . This process involves sequential steps that facilitate between buyers and suppliers, starting from initial and progressing to continuous monitoring. By following these steps, organizations can achieve improved efficiency, though success depends on mutual commitment and data accuracy. Step 1: Assess Needs and Define Objectives
Organizations should begin by evaluating their current management practices to identify pain points such as stockouts or excess holding costs. This assessment includes defining clear objectives, such as enhancing responsiveness and reducing administrative burdens. Key performance indicators (KPIs) are established at this stage, including target inventory turns appropriate to the industry, such as higher rates in fast-moving sectors like pharmaceuticals, and high service levels to ensure reliable product availability. These KPIs provide measurable benchmarks to track progress and justify the VMI initiative. Step 2: Select and Negotiate with Vendors
Next, potential vendors are identified and evaluated based on their experience with VMI, reliability, and ability to integrate systems for sharing. Negotiations focus on establishing contracts that outline responsibilities, including vendor access to point-of-sale or and agreed replenishment frequencies, often weekly or bi-weekly to match demand patterns. Contracts should also specify performance expectations, such as on-time delivery rates, to foster trust and in the . This step ensures the selected vendor can effectively manage without compromising buyer control. Step 3: Conduct Pilot Programs
To test feasibility, a pilot program is launched on a limited scale, such as a of stock-keeping units (SKUs) or specific locations, allowing for identification of issues like challenges before full rollout. These pilots last a sufficient period, often several months, providing time to monitor replenishment accuracy and adjust parameters based on real-world performance. During this phase, both parties collaborate closely to refine processes, ensuring the vendor's forecasting aligns with actual demand. Successful pilots often demonstrate initial reductions in stockouts, validating the approach. Step 4: Scale Up with Training and Monitoring
Upon pilot success, the program expands enterprise-wide, accompanied by comprehensive training for staff on new roles, such as data validation and exception handling. Performance is monitored through regular reviews of KPIs, with adjustments made based on pilot insights, like optimizing reorder points to prevent overstocking. This scaling phase emphasizes ongoing communication to address any discrepancies, ensuring smooth integration across the supply chain. Vendor involvement in training helps build internal capabilities for sustained collaboration. Step 5: Ongoing Evaluation
Finally, continuous evaluation is implemented using established metrics to measure long-term impact, including high order accuracy and significant cost reductions in inventory holding, potentially 15-30% based on case studies. Quarterly audits and feedback loops allow for refinements, such as updating forecasts, while against industry standards ensures the program remains effective. This step reinforces the partnership by celebrating achievements and proactively mitigating emerging issues.

Supporting Technologies

Vendor-managed inventory (VMI) relies on foundational technologies for data exchange, beginning with (EDI) standards that enable standardized, automated transmission of inventory and order information between vendors and retailers. EDI facilitated initial VMI implementations by allowing of documents like purchase orders and inventory reports, reducing paperwork errors and speeding up replenishment cycles. Complementing EDI, Extensible (XML) emerged as a flexible format for structuring data, supporting more detailed and customizable exchanges in early VMI systems. These technologies have evolved toward Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), which provide real-time, bidirectional integration for dynamic VMI operations. APIs allow vendors to access live levels and data directly from retailer systems, enabling immediate adjustments to orders without manual intervention. This shift from batch-oriented EDI to API-driven connectivity has improved responsiveness, with integrations often combining both for hybrid efficiency in supply chains. Modern VMI advancements incorporate Internet of Things (IoT) sensors, particularly Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) tags, for automated inventory tracking at customer sites. RFID enables vendors to monitor stock in real time without physical access, scanning entire pallets to update levels automatically and significantly reducing the need for manual counts, with labor efficiency improvements up to 30% faster. This automation minimizes discrepancies and supports consignment models where ownership transfers only upon sale. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) enhance VMI through predictive forecasting, analyzing historical sales, market trends, and external factors to significantly improve accuracy over traditional methods. In VMI contexts, AI algorithms process shared data to generate replenishment recommendations, reducing stockouts and overstock by optimizing order quantities proactively. These tools integrate with existing systems to refine forecasts continuously, outperforming traditional methods in volatile environments. Cloud platforms serve as scalable backbones for VMI , hosting centralized repositories accessible to multiple stakeholders via secure web interfaces. Solutions like cloud-native VMI software unify fragmented , enabling vendors to view real-time across retailer locations without on-premise hardware. This supports global collaboration, with features for automated alerts and that enhance efficiency, though must be ensured in shared systems. Blockchain technology bolsters VMI by providing immutable ledgers for tracking, ensuring transparent records of inventory movements and ownership. In arrangements, smart contracts on automate title transfers upon sale verification, mitigating disputes over stock liability. This decentralized approach enhances trust in multi-party supply chains, with pilots demonstrating reduced fraud and faster audit trails. As of 2025, VMI trends emphasize integration with networks for ultra-low-latency , enabling near-instantaneous updates between remote sensors and vendor systems in extended supply chains. Additionally, AI-driven dynamic replenishment is gaining traction in , where algorithms adjust orders in real time based on browsing patterns and sales velocity to support just-in-time delivery models. These developments, combined with IoT, promise further automation in high-volume online retail scenarios.

Mathematical Modeling

Bi-level Models

Bi-level models in vendor-managed (VMI) represent foundational mathematical frameworks for optimizing decisions in a simple consisting of a single and a single retailer. These models treat the as the decision-maker responsible for replenishment, aiming to minimize the total cost (TSC) while for both parties' objectives. The TSC is typically formulated as the sum of holding costs (h), ordering or setup costs (o), and or backorder costs (s), expressed for a single product as TSC = (h_v * average ) + (h_r * average retailer ) + (o_v * number of setups) + (o_r * number of orders received) + (s * expected ), where subscripts v and r denote and retailer, respectively. This integrated cost structure contrasts with traditional models by consolidating decisions to reduce duplication in ordering and holding across the chain. A key tool in these models is the (EOQ) adapted for VMI, which determines the optimal order quantity to balance setup and holding costs. The basic EOQ formula is = \sqrt{\frac{2DS}{h}}, where D is the annual rate, S is the setup or ordering cost per order, and h is the holding cost per unit per year. In VMI, this is modified to incorporate multiple shipments per production cycle (n), yielding production lot size as n and retailer order quantity as , minimizing TSC under joint optimization. For instance, with deterministic , the model assumes constant D and derives by differentiating TSC with respect to and n, setting partial derivatives to zero: \frac{\partial TSC}{\partial } = 0 and \frac{\partial TSC}{\partial n} = 0, leading to closed-form solutions like n \approx \sqrt{\frac{D S_v}{h_v }} where S_v is setup cost. Bi-level programming formalizes the hierarchical decision process in VMI, with the vendor at the upper level minimizing TSC subject to the retailer's lower-level constraints, such as acceptable inventory levels or service requirements. The upper-level problem is \min_{Q, n} TSC(Q, n) s.t. retailer's profit \geq baseline and capacity limits, while the lower level solves the retailer's response, often \max profit_r(Q). Coordination mechanisms like quantity discounts resolve non-cooperative equilibria, where the vendor offers price reductions d(Q) = c (1 - \frac{Q_0 - Q}{Q_0}) for Q > Q_0 (retailer's traditional EOQ), ensuring the retailer adopts the joint optimal Q and achieving channel coordination. These models assume deterministic demand and infinite production capacity at the vendor, simplifying analysis to focus on lot-sizing without variability. Numerical illustrations demonstrate 10-20% TSC reductions over non-VMI scenarios. Under consignment arrangements in VMI, where the retains of at the retailer's site until sale, replenishment policies emphasize periodic review based on actual consumption to trigger deliveries. The R = d L + SS, where d is average daily and L is , ensures timely replenishment. To buffer against variability despite deterministic base assumptions, (SS) is incorporated as SS = z \sigma \sqrt{L}, where z is the factor (e.g., z = 1.65 for 95% service), \sigma is the standard deviation of daily , and \sqrt{L} accounts for uncertainty. Derivation follows from the normal distribution approximation: SS covers the z-quantile of lead-time variability, z \sigma_{DL} = z \sigma \sqrt{L} assuming independent daily demands. This policy reduces stockouts while minimizing excess holding under control.

Multi-level and Advanced Models

In multi-level vendor-managed inventory (VMI) systems, the single-vendor multi-retailer model addresses coordination across multiple downstream entities by integrating inventory decisions to minimize total supply chain costs (TSC). This approach typically employs mixed-integer programming to optimize replenishment policies, formulated as minimizing the sum of holding costs hiIih_i I_i for inventory levels IiI_i at retailer ii and ordering costs ojNjo_j N_j for order frequency NjN_j at the vendor, subject to capacity constraints and demand satisfaction requirements. For instance, a nonlinear mixed-integer programming model for this setup under deterministic demand ensures joint optimization of order quantities and frequencies while respecting service levels and backorder limits. Stochastic models extend these frameworks by incorporating uncertainty, often using or to derive robust replenishment strategies in VMI. In such models, the manages across multiple retailers under probabilistic , evaluating expected costs via state transitions in a representation of positions. An adaptation of the for VMI contexts determines optimal order quantity Q∗=F−1(cucu+co)Q^* = F^{-1}\left( \frac{c_u}{c_u + c_o} \right), where FF is the cumulative distribution, cuc_u the underage cost, and coc_o the overage cost, balancing and excess risks in multi-retailer settings. These approaches enhance under variability, as demonstrated in where VMI reduces expected by up to 25% compared to deterministic baselines. Contractual models in multi-level VMI analyze vendor-buyer interactions as non-cooperative games, seeking Nash equilibria for pricing, quantity, and profit allocation to align incentives. Revenue-sharing contracts, where the vendor receives a fraction of retailer sales in lieu of full wholesale payments, coordinate the chain by mitigating double marginalization, with equilibrium solutions derived from Stackelberg or Nash formulations that optimize joint profits. For example, in a serial VMI supply chain, such contracts achieve channel coordination when the sharing ratio equals the vendor's cost fraction, improving overall efficiency over wholesale pricing. Seminal work shows these mechanisms can increase supply chain profits by 10-20% in decentralized settings. By 2025, advanced multi-echelon VMI models integrate for global supply chains, leveraging to optimize inventory across tiers while handling uncertainties like disruptions. AI-driven approaches, such as in multi-echelon simulations, reduce variability impacts by approximately 30% through predictive adjustments to and reorder points. These models, often implemented via platforms combining sensing with optimization algorithms, enable real-time vendor decisions for multi-retailer networks, as evidenced in benchmark studies showing 40-50% reductions in AI-enhanced VMI systems.

Applications and Examples

Industry-Specific Applications

In the retail and grocery sector, vendor-managed inventory (VMI) is particularly adapted for managing perishable goods through shelf-level replenishment systems that enable frequent vendor adjustments based on real-time sales data and inventory levels. This approach minimizes overstocking of items like and , where spoilage is a major concern, by automating order forecasts and deliveries to match daily demand fluctuations. For instance, services like Shelf Engine operate as a VMI provider for over 3,000 grocery stores, purchasing products from , managing stock at the retailer level, and charging only for sold items, which has been shown to reduce waste in perishable categories by 30 to 50 percent. In , especially the , VMI integrates seamlessly with just-in-time () production and systems to ensure timely delivery of components, thereby preventing production halts. Suppliers monitor customer inventory electronically and replenish parts exactly when needed, reducing the risk of stockouts during assembly lines. A notable example is ZF Friedrichshafen AG, a global automotive supplier, which implements VMI with over 50 suppliers managing approximately 900 item numbers through integrated platforms like SupplyOn, connected to its system for daily stock visibility. This setup has minimized production downtime by optimizing delivery planning and reducing transport frequency by 30 percent, while lowering overall stock levels by more than €1 million. Healthcare applications of VMI emphasize temperature-controlled for pharmaceuticals and supplies to maintain and meet stringent regulatory requirements. Vendors use real-time monitoring tools to manage inventory at hospitals or clinics, ensuring just-in-time replenishment of sensitive items like or biologics that require storage between 2-8°C. This model supports compliance with FDA guidelines on and current good manufacturing practices (cGMP), including accurate recordkeeping for distribution and disposition of drugs. In supply chains, for example, VMI systems have been deployed to achieve full by integrating temperature sensors and automated alerts, preventing spoilage and ensuring uninterrupted availability in resource-limited settings. In and , VMI facilitates dynamic inventory management in warehouses to accommodate variable patterns driven by trends and promotions. Platforms enable vendors to access velocity and forecasts, allowing automated replenishment to fulfillment centers without retailer intervention. Amazon exemplifies this through its Vendor Central program, where it assumes responsibility for inventory levels using historical and , streamlining vendor fulfillment for high-volume, fluctuating orders and reducing stockouts during peak periods.

Case Studies

One of the seminal implementations of vendor-managed inventory (VMI) occurred between and (P&G) starting in 1985, marking an early adoption of the model in retail. Through this partnership, P&G took responsibility for monitoring and replenishing Walmart's inventory of P&G products using (EDI) for real-time data sharing, which enabled automated ordering and reduced manual intervention. The collaboration, which evolved to incorporate collaborative planning, forecasting, and replenishment (CPFR), resulted in a 70% reduction in inventory levels and improved service levels from 96% to 99%, significantly lowering stockouts and enhancing efficiency. Lessons from this case emphasized the critical role of EDI integration in scaling VMI across large retail networks, allowing suppliers to align production closely with retailer demand while minimizing excess stock. In the industrial distribution sector, Graybar has employed VMI with on-site vendor-managed bins to support maintenance, repair, and operations (MRO) materials for clients, ensuring continuous availability of electrical and mechanical supplies without customer intervention. Suppliers like Graybar monitor bin levels via automated systems and replenish as needed, shifting ordering responsibilities from buyers to vendors. This approach has been reported to cut buyer ordering time substantially and deliver overall cost savings through optimized holding and reduced administrative overhead. The model's success highlights the value of physical on-site presence in VMI for high-volume, low-value items, fostering tighter integration between distributors and end-users in fragmented supply chains. ZF Group, a global automotive supplier, implemented VMI for managing fasteners and other components through the SupplyOn platform, connecting over 50 suppliers to monitor approximately 900 item numbers in real time. Daily synchronization of stock data from ZF's system to SupplyOn's Inventory Monitor allows suppliers to plan deliveries based on identical information, addressing challenges in global data alignment across international operations. This initiative achieved a stock level reduction valued at more than €1 million and a 30% decrease in average transport frequency, streamlining and administrative processes for B- and C-class parts like seals and workpieces. Key lessons include the importance of robust digital platforms for overcoming hurdles in multinational , enabling better delivery compliance and supplier . A post-2019 example involves Nomeco, a Danish pharmaceutical and grocery distributor, which enhanced its VMI program for over 350 pharmacies using AI-driven forecasting integrated into RELEX Solutions' platform to handle post-COVID demand volatility. This AI-VMI approach automated replenishment planning, improving order fill rates and availability by predicting fluctuations in perishable and non-perishable goods. The implementation reduced manual planning needs, eliminating overtime for VMI teams and allowing fewer planners to manage more locations. Lessons drawn emphasize the benefits of AI in predictive power for grocery and pharmacy VMI networks.

References

  1. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00207543.2021.1983222
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9755805/
  3. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228342062_Exploring_the_Benefits_of_Vendor_Managed_Inventory
  4. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MSCRA-03-2022-0009/full/html
  5. https://www.naccq.ac.nz/vmi_retail_sc.pdf
  6. https://scm.ncsu.edu/scm-articles/article/vendor-managed-inventory-think-twice-and-consider-the-risks
  7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.10.021
  8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242344693_Vendor-Managed_Inventory_and_Bullwhip_Reduction_in_a_Two-Level_Supply_Chain
  9. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2019.94068
  10. https://www.6sigma.us/manufacturing/just-in-time-production-system-jit/
  11. https://kanbanzone.com/resources/lean/toyota-production-system/
  12. https://www.netsuite.com/portal/resource/articles/inventory-management/just-in-time-inventory.shtml
  13. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/channel-partnerships-streamline-distribution/
  14. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2607240_Efficient_Consumer_Response_ECR_A_Survey_of_the_Australian_Grocery_Industry
  15. https://www.just-style.com/features/efficient-consumer-response-improving-value-chain-management-part-1/
  16. https://web.mit.edu/sheffi/www/documents/genMedia.theValueOfCPFR.pdf
  17. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320633561_Efficient_Consumer_Response_ECR_Practices_as_Responsible_for_the_Creation_of_Knowledge_and_Sustainable_Competitive_Advantages_in_the_Grocery_Industry
  18. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/13598549910284574/full/html
  19. https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/isre.12.3.304.9708
  20. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:20371/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  21. https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/file/971290/1/Krichanchai%2520%2520MacCarthy%2520IJLM%25202016%2520REPOSITORY.pdf
  22. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1484164/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  23. https://www.businessresearchinsights.com/market-reports/vendor-managed-inventory-system-market-113361
  24. https://marketintelo.com/report/vendor-managed-inventory-platform-market
  25. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/europe-vendor-managed-inventory-vmi-service-market-hlgcc
  26. https://datahorizzonresearch.com/vendor-managed-inventory-vmi-market-63584
  27. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/asia-pacific-vendor-managed-inventory-vmi-service-market-rb8ef
  28. https://faculty.ucr.edu/~elodieg/Adida-Ratisoontorn-EJOR-2011.pdf
  29. https://www.anderson.ucla.edu/documents/areas/fac/dotm/bio/pdf_CC17.pdf
  30. https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2008&context=cmsp
  31. https://swbakerlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/vendormanaged.pdf
  32. https://prod-media-v2.clearlawinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/12/CLI-High-Risk-Issues-in-Commercial-Agreements-The-Buyers-and-Sellers-Perspectives.pdf
  33. https://docs.infor.com/ln/10.6/en-us/lnolh/docs/ln_10.6_crossvmiug__en-us.pdf
  34. https://research.tue.nl/files/221566629/Vendor_managed_inventory_in_practice_understanding_and_mitigating_the_impact_of_supplier_heterogeneity.pdf
  35. https://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/fulltext/176432/local_176432.pdf
  36. http://www.columbia.edu/~gmg2/4000/pdfold/info_sharing_1127.pdf
  37. https://www.uphance.com/blog/vendor-managed-inventory-vmi/
  38. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jan-Holmstroem/publication/235274003_The_Impact_of_Increasing_Demand_Visibility_on_Production_and_Inventory_Control_Efficiency/links/0deec51dc70ef1c472000000/The-Impact-of-Increasing-Demand-Visibility-on-Production-and-Inventory-Control-Efficiency.pdf
  39. https://www.academia.edu/34469376/Retail_Supply_Chain_and_Vendor_Managed_Inventory_System_A_Review
  40. https://www.descartes.com/resources/blog/vendor-managed-inventory-vmi-powered-by-edi
  41. https://www.truecommerce.com/blog/edi-api-integration/
  42. https://www.kladana.com/blog/inventory-management/vendor-managed-inventory/
  43. https://idea4industry.com/articles/improve-accuracy-efficiency-in-vmi-with-edi/
  44. https://www.jittransportation.com/posts/what-is-vendor-managed-inventory-in-3pl
  45. https://www.alexanderjarvis.com/what-is-supplier-fill-rate-in-ecommerce/
  46. https://oxmaint.com/blog/post/what-is-vendor-managed-inventory-and-how-it-works
  47. https://www.itradenetwork.com/resources/vendor-managed-inventory-letting-both-buyers-suppliers-grow-their-margins
  48. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395721309_Lean_Inventory_Management_Integrated_with_Vendor_Coordination_to_Reduce_Costs_and_Improve_Manufacturing_Supply_Chain_Efficiency
  49. https://www.aimsciences.org/article/doi/10.3934/jimo.2023074
  50. https://pulllogic.com/navigating-supply-chain-disruptions-with-resilient-inventory-management-strategies/
  51. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=17319&context=dissertations
  52. https://www.shipbob.com/blog/vendor-managed-inventory/
  53. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Inclusive_Deployment_of_Blockchain_for_Supply_Chains_Part_4_Report.pdf
  54. https://www.enerpize.com/hub/vendor-managed-inventory-definition-types-advantages
  55. https://www.ijerd.com/paper/vol2-issue3/H02034650.pdf
  56. https://bizowie.com/inventory-turnover-the-complete-guide-to-measuring-and-optimizing-inventory-performance
  57. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258137757_Analyzing_the_Factors_for_VMI_Implementation_A_Framework
  58. https://scm.ncsu.edu/scm-articles/article/vendor-managed-inventory-vmi-three-steps-in-making-it-work
  59. https://itemit.com/benefits-of-vendor-managed-inventory-for-your-business/
  60. https://www.opsengine.co/glossary/what-is-vendor-managed-inventory-vmi
  61. https://www.acornic.co.uk/implementing-vmi-supply-chain-top-questions/
  62. https://www.netsuite.com/portal/resource/articles/inventory-management/vendor-managed-inventory.shtml
  63. https://www.unisco.com/warehousing/vendor-management-inventory
  64. https://www.edi2xml.com/blog/automate-and-modernize-edi-workflows-with-edi2xml-rest-api-2-0/
  65. https://graceblood.com/blog/apis-edi-for-the-modern-supply-chain/
  66. https://aayutechnologies.com/blog/api-diven-edi-modernizing-b2b-integration/
  67. https://www.cloudesign.com/blogs/iot-and-rfid-in-inventory-management/
  68. https://altavantconsulting.com/rfid-technology-inventory-tracking/
  69. https://surgere.com/blog/rfid-the-smartest-inventory-management-technology/
  70. https://blueridgeglobal.com/blog/ai-demand-forecasting-how-it-works-and-why-its-replacing-traditional-methods/
  71. https://www.truecommerce.com/solutions/vmi/
  72. https://www.finaleinventory.com/inventory-planning-software/vendor-managed-inventory
  73. https://www.yokogawa.com/us/solutions/solutions/supply-chain-optimization/iiot-daas-supply-chain-visibility/
  74. https://www.zycus.com/blog/supplier-management/guide-to-vendor-managed-inventory
  75. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8908481
  76. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335061461_Enhanced_Vendor-managed_Inventory_through_Blockchain
  77. https://iconsmat.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/v3.1.5.pdf
  78. https://www.scmr.com/article/5g-supply-chain-connectivitiy-enhancing-logistics-digital-age
  79. https://emplicit.co/ai-powered-replenishment-for-ecommerce-growth/
  80. https://www.eturns.com/resources/blog/2-inventory-trends-to-watch-ai-sensor-technology/
  81. http://ieomsociety.org/pilsen2019/papers/139.pdf
  82. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0377221795001281
  83. https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/mnsc.35.7.812
  84. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0377221709008960
  85. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270098311_Vendor_Managed_Inventory_of_a_Single-vendor_Multiple-retailer_Single-warehouse_Supply_Chain_under_Stochastic_Demands
  86. https://repository.gatech.edu/bitstreams/9dff2ca4-d13b-4072-9428-b62c881ccd5c/download
  87. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0957417408009196
  88. https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/opre.47.2.183
  89. https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0215
  90. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322185707_Pricing_and_inventory_decisions_in_a_vendor_managed_inventory_system_with_revenue_sharing_contract
  91. https://www.e2open.com/news/press-releases/e2open-releases-2024-forecasting-and-inventory-benchmark-study/
  92. https://throughput.world/blog/multi-echelon-inventory-optimization/
  93. https://www.logility.com/blog/elevating-inventory-management-with-multi-echelon-inventory-optimization/
  94. https://window.wwu.edu/shelf-engine-harnessing-data-fill-grocery-shelves
  95. https://www.supplyon.com/en/customers/case-study-zf-vendor-managed-inventory/
  96. https://www.zf.com/brazil/media/media_in_/documents/portal_de_fornecedores/cg_compras_diretas/Global-Logistics-Directive-_GLD_.pdf
  97. https://www.unisco.com/comparison/vendor-managed-inventory-vs-temperature-controlled-shipping
  98. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7024728/
  99. https://www.purplecowservices.com/digital-talk/mastering-inventory-management-on-amazon-vendor-central/
  100. https://www.academia.edu/10317486/How_Walmart_and_P_and_G_Can_Enhance_Supply_Chain_Management_with_CPFR_Initiatives
  101. https://www.eturns.com/resources/blog/vmi-what-is-vendor-managed-inventory-examples-and-solutions/
  102. https://www.supplyon.com/wp-content/uploads/import/downloads/Case_Studies/EN_ZF_VMI_Success_Story.pdf
  103. https://www.relexsolutions.com/resources/case-nomeco/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.