Economical Assessment of The Impact of RFID Technology and EPC System On The Fast-Moving Consumer Goods Supply Chain
Economical Assessment of The Impact of RFID Technology and EPC System On The Fast-Moving Consumer Goods Supply Chain
Economical Assessment of The Impact of RFID Technology and EPC System On The Fast-Moving Consumer Goods Supply Chain
, Antonio Rizzi
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Parma, Viale G.P. Usberti 181/A, 43100 Parma, Italy
Received 28 February 2006; accepted 11 December 2006
Available online 9 June 2007
Abstract
This paper describes a research whose aim is to quantitatively assess the impact of radio frequency identication (RFID)
technology and electronic product code (EPC) system on the main processes of the fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG)
supply chain.
A three-echelon supply chain is examined, composed of manufacturers, distributors and retailers of FMCG. A
questionnaire survey was performed to collect both quantitative and qualitative data related to logistics processes of each
player. Starting from these data, a feasibility study has been carried out in order to assess the economical suitability of
RFID and EPC adoption in the FMCG supply chain, both for each player and for the FMCG supply chain as a whole.
Results of the feasibility study show that RFID and EPC implementation is still not protable for all echelons examined.
Specically, both from a non-integrated and from an integrated scenario, RFID adoption with pallet-level tagging
provides positive revenues for all supply-chain players. Conversely, adopting a case-level tagging, substantial costs arise for
manufacturers, involving negative economical results. Outcomes of this study provide an economical justication to the
RFID and EPC implementation in the FMCG supply chain.
r 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: RFID; EPC; Investment analysis; FMCG supply chain
1. Introduction
Radio frequency identication (RFID) is the
generic name for technologies that use radio waves
to automatically identify individual items. There are
several methods of identifying items using RFID,
but most of the systems consist of a reader and a
tag, the latter being made up of two main
components, namely an antenna and a chip. The
reader sends out electromagnetic waves that form a
magnetic eld when they join with the antenna on
the RFID tag. The tag draws power from the
magnetic eld and uses it to power the microchips
circuits. The chip then modulates the waves that the
tag sends back to the reader and the reader converts
the new waves into digital data. Data are stored into
the tag chip in the form of an electronic product
code (EPC). EPC standards have been developed by
the Auto-ID Center, a partnership founded in 1999
by ve leading research universities and nearly 100
leading retailers, consumer products makers and
software companies (Niemeyer et al., 2003).
EPC data collected are then passed to and shared
through the EPCglobal network. The latter has been
dened as a way of leveraging the internet to access
ARTICLE IN PRESS
www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpe
0925-5273/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.05.007
( )
. (2)
Finally, the IRR of the investment was computed
as the interest rate that makes DCF null at the end
of the 5-year period considered:
IRR
i
X
n
j0
DCF
j
0
( )
. (3)
In this scenario, substantial benets are achieved
when applying RFID technology to receiving,
warehouse management and shipping pro-
cesses. Specically, from the numerical results of
the computation, the following conclusions emerge.
Savings in receiving activities result for about
90% from shortening of time required to perform
checking operations on pallets received, and for
about 10% both from improved accuracy of the
process and from avoiding labelling operations.
About 75% of savings in warehouse management
can be attributed to reduction of shrinks, which,
however, are not completely removed. Cutting
down the time required for replenishment cycles
and to perform inventory counts involves the
remaining 18% of costs savings. Finally, shipping
operations benet from a dramatic shortening of
time required for pallets identication, which yields
most of the savings (54%) of this process.
Investment analysis of distributors DC leads to
similar remarks. Distributors DC benets from
h40,000 NPV, and initial investments are paid back
in 4.5 years. If compared with the manufacturers
DC, no costs arise in tagging and labelling
activities, since we assumed that such costs are wholly
charged to the manufacturers. Consequently, cost of
tags required for picking pallets and costs for
software and implementation represent the main
investments for distributors DC. In shipping
processes, savings result from shortening of time
required to perform checking operations on pallets
shipped (80%), from better accuracy of the process
and from removing labelling operations (20%), the
latter being also the main benet achievable in
receiving. Warehouse management benets from
a dramatic shortening of time required to perform
replenishment cycles and inventory counts. Conver-
sely, no substantial benets are achieved in shrink
abatement, since product losses due to expiration
date have emerged as trivial for the retailers DC.
Finally, retail stores benets from a NPV of
about h11,000, and initial investments are paid back
in 4.5 years. As shown in Table 5, only receiving
and putaway operations can be affected by the
implementation of RFID and EPC standards in a
pallet-level tagging scenario. For receiving opera-
tions, costs arising are primarily due to investments
in software required for processes management,
installation of RFID gates and RF coverage of the
receiving area. Savings mainly result from reducing
the time required to perform counts and check-in
operations on pallets received (75%). Similarly, RF
coverage and FLT equipments count for 30% and
70% of the arising costs in putaway activities.
Nonetheless, cost savings can be achieved in terms
of reduction of time required for inventory counts,
which allows about 90% of total savings.
Table 6 shows the results of investment analysis in
the non-integrated scenario with case-level tagging.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 6
Results of investment evaluation for the FMCG supply chain in non integrated scenario with case level tagging
Manufacturers DC Years
0 1 2 3 4 5
Discount rate 1 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.82 0.78
Cost savingscost arising
Tagging and labelling 1,489,500 1,489,500 1,489,500 1,489,500 1,489,500
Receiving 112,665 112,665 112,665 112,665 112,665
Warehouse management 34,709 34,709 34,709 34,709 34,709
Order picking 69,681 69,681 69,681 69,681 69,681
Shipping 69,780 69,780 69,780 69,780 69,780
Total cost/saving 1,202,665 1,202,665 1,202,665 1,202,665 1,202,665
Amortization 69,000 69,000 69,000 69,000 69,000
Gross margin 1,271,665 1,271,665 1,271,665 1,271,665 1,271,665
Taxes 0 0 0 0 0
E. Bottani, A. Rizzi / Int. J. Production Economics 112 (2008) 548569 560
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 6 (continued )
Net prot 1,271,665 1,271,665 1,271,665 1,271,665 1,271,665
Investment 379,500 0 0 0 0 0
Net cash ow 379,500 1,202,665 1,202,665 1,202,665 1,202,665 1,202,665
Discounted cash ow 379,500 1,145,396 1,090,853 1,038,908 989,436 942,320
Net present value (h) 5,586,412
Payback period (years) 45
Internal rate of return (%)
ROI (%)
Distributors DC Years
0 1 2 3 4 5
Discount rate 1 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.82 0.78
Cost savingscost arising
Tagging and labelling
Receiving 79,645 79,645 79,645 79,645 79,645
Warehouse management 52,323 52,323 52,323 52,323 52,323
Order picking 148,259 148,259 148,259 148,259 148,259
Shipping 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000
Total cost/saving 322,227 322,227 322,227 322,227 322,227
Amortization 129,000 129,000 129,000 129,000 129,000
Gross margin 193,227 193,227 193,227 193,227 193,227
Taxes 65,697 65,697 65,697 65,697 65,697
Net prot 127,530 127,530 127,530 127,530 127,530
Investment 709,500 0 0 0 0 0
Net cash ow 709,500 256,530 256,530 256,530 256,530 256,530
Discounted cash ow 709,500 244,314 232,680 221,600 211,048 200,998
Net present value (h) 401,139
Payback period (years) 3.052
Internal rate of return (%) 23.70%
ROI (%) 24%
Retailer Years
0 1 2 3 4 5
Discount rate 1 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.82 0.78
Cost savingscost arising
Tagging and labelling
Receiving 10,452 10,452 10,452 10,452 10,452
Putaway 29,880 29,880 29,880 29,880 29,880
Order picking 96,222 96,222 96,222 96,222 96,222
Shipping 10,452 10,452 10,452 10,452 10,452
Total cost/saving 136,554 136,554 136,554 136,554 136,554
Amortization 27,720 27,720 27,720 27,720 27,720
Gross margin 108,834 108,834 108,834 108,834 108,834
Taxes 37,004 37,004 37,004 37,004 37,004
Net prot 71,830 71,830 71,830 71,830 71,830
Investment 152,460 0 0 0 0 0
Net cash ow 152,460 99,550 99,550 99,550 99,550 99,550
Discounted cash ow 152,460 94,810 90,295 85,995 81,900 78,000
Net present value (h) 278,541
Payback period (years) 1.638
Internal rate of return (%) 58.80%
ROI (%) 62%
E. Bottani, A. Rizzi / Int. J. Production Economics 112 (2008) 548569 561
For manufacturers DC, high costs arise due to
investments for purchasing wider quantity of RFID
tags, required to tag each case entering the supply
chain. As can be seen from the high negative NPV,
resulting benets do not compensate such costs.
Nonetheless, picking operations now benet from
substantial savings, which could not be achieved
under a pallet-level tagging scenario. Specically,
reduction of time required to perform picking
activities and related checks, and shrink abatement,
represent the main components of total savings,
accounting for 17%, 58% and 19%, respectively.
Additional savings, whose importance is substan-
tially smaller, derive from the removal of logistics
labels, which are now avoided and substituted by
RFID tags.
An opposite situation occurs for the distributors
DC, which benets from an NPV of about
h400,000. This result can be justied considering
that no expenses for RFID tags should be sustained
by the distributor; thus, cost savings widely over-
come costs arising for this player. In case-level
tagging scenario, distributors DC can also achieve
higher savings than in the previous one. Specically,
additional savings emerge in picking operations,
mainly due to time shortening for picking cycles and
checking activities performed on mixed pallets.
These elements account for about 70% and 25%
of the total cost savings, while lower benets (1%)
can be achieved thanks to the improved accuracy of
picking operations, due to reduction of errors of
product quantity/type in picking pallets. Such errors
could not be identied nor rectied in a pallet-level
tagging scenario.
Finally, for the retail store, the resulting NPV is
about h280,000. By comparing Tables 5 and 6, no
substantial changes are observed in outcomes
related to receiving and putaway processes.
Conversely, order picking and shipping are
now included in the analysis, since these pro-
cesses are affected by both investments and savings
when case-level tagging is adopted. Specically,
investments are related to RFID gates to be
installed for real-time monitoring the number of
cases moved from the backroom to the shop oor,
while savings mainly derive from reducing the
time required for inventory replenishment in the
shop oor as well as in the backroom. Additional
benets can be achieved from shrink abatement,
thanks to the real-time visibility of inventory and
possible promotion on products close to expira-
tion dates.
Results of the non-integrated scenario allow
concluding that the case-level tagging is not cost
competitive for all supply-chain players; in parti-
cular, manufacturers should sustain the higher costs
of implementation. Since costs are mainly due to
purchasing RFID tags, it can be concluded that
10 ch tags cost is still too high to enable the
adoption of case-level tagging. A viable break
even cost of tags, that is the unitary cost of tags
allowing the manufacturers investment to be paid
back in 5 years, has thus been estimated. As
mentioned, the initial investment is a function of
the unitary cost of tags, as well as the whole NPV,
according to Eq. (1). The break even cost of tag
has thus been computed by imposing the NPV of
the manufacturers DC to score zero at the end of
the 5-year period hypothesized, as shown in the
following equation:
break even cost tag cost
X
n
j0
DCF
j
0
( )
. (4)
Such cost has been estimated in about 1.45 ch for
the non-integrated scenario.
4.2. Integrated scenario
In the integrated scenario, data sharing and
real-time availability through EPCglobal network
make additional benets possible, namely:
Reduction of safety stocks for each supply-chain
player, due to the improved visibility of inven-
tories brought in by the EPCglobal network in
the whole supply chain, and thus to the reduction
of the bullwhip effect. As a consequence, lower
costs of holding stocks result.
Reduction of stock-outs at the retail store. Both
manufacturers and distributors can benet from
such a reduction, mainly in terms of increasing
turnover and improved service level to custo-
mers, respectively.
To compute savings in safety stocks, we followed
the analytical approach proposed by Chen et al.
(2000), which have quantied the bullwhip effect
reduction when comparing two opposite situations,
namely sharing of demand data between supply-
chain partners and absence of information sharing.
Applying the mathematical expressions provided by
the authors to compare the non-integrated and
ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Bottani, A. Rizzi / Int. J. Production Economics 112 (2008) 548569 562
the integrated scenarios, results for manufacturers
DC show a reduction of demand standard deviation
of 46.54% and 55.42% for pallet- and case-level
tagging, respectively. These results have been
obtained assuming an average procurement lead
time of 10 days and a mobile mean interval of 5
days, which have been obtained from the data
collection phase. For distributors DC, decrease in
demand standard deviation is less appreciable: no
reduction results in the pallet-level tagging scenario,
while about 13.45% of reduction in demand
standard deviation has been computed in the case-
level tagging scenario. As a matter of fact, RFID
and EPC implementation cannot improve inventory
visibility in distributors DCs when adopting a
pallet-level tagging: since information related to
retailers orders is currently available, no additional
data are provided exploiting pallet-level tagging.
Numerical results have been obtained starting from
characteristics of the representative FMCG sup-
ply chain, namely average procurement lead times
of 1 day for the retailer and 4.5 days for the
distributors DC, and mobile mean interval of 5
days both players.
To quantify the economical impact of safety
stocks reduction, cost of holding stocks has been
also computed, starting from data collected during
the survey phase. For manufacturers DC these
costs are 143.47 h/year and pallet, while for dis-
tributors DC results show a cost of stocks of
136.51 h/year and pallet. The main reason for this
difference has to be found in the higher average
economical value of pallets for the manufacturer,
and in the higher inventory turn rate for the
distributors DC.
As a result, for manufacturers DC, benets
achievable in terms of safety stocks reduction
account for 267,095 and 318,043 h/year in the pallet-
and case-level tagging scenario, respectively. Nu-
merical results have been obtained starting from
average safety stocks of about 4000 pallets, which
represents 25% of the average stock, as emerged
from the representative FMCG supply chain.
Similarly, for distributors DC, benets achievable
in terms of safety stocks reduction have been
computed starting from average safety stocks of
about 3500 pallets, which represent 12.5% of the
average stock. Results, for the case-level tagging
scenario, show that the reduction of safety stocks
can provide 64,272 h/year of savings. Those benets
have been added as savings when computing
the annual NCF of each player. Tables 7 and 8
summarize the results obtained in pallet- and case-
level tagging, respectively.
As can be seen from Table 7, in a pallet-level
tagging, improvements in NPV are observed for all
supply-chain players. More specically, manufac-
turers DC benet from savings, resulting from
decrease in safety stocks, which allow reaching
h980,000 NPV. Conversely, distributors DC and
retailer benet from additional savings in receiving
operations, due to the real-time availability of data
on pallets received, which allow reducing the time
required for checking and acceptance operations.
In the case-level tagging scenario (see Table 8),
the additional benets of safety stock reduction do
not compensate the high costs of tags for manu-
facturers DC, providing a high negative NPV.
Applying Eq. (4) to the numerical results obtained,
the break even cost of tags has been estimated as
about 3.5 ch for this scenario. Conversely, both
distributors DC and retailer can benet from
positive NPV of about h1,220,000 and h370,000,
respectively. Again, both players benet from
savings in receiving operations, while distribu-
tors DC can gain additional savings from safety
stocks reduction and from decrease in time required
to perform picking operations.
Moreover, starting from data computed for the
representative FMCG supply chain, effects re-
sulting from the reduction of stock-out at the retail
store have been quantied for both manufacturers
and distributors DCs. Such benets, however, have
not been taken into account in the integrated
scenario, due to a twofold reason. First, they have
been quantied in terms of additional annual
turnover, but no information is available on their
prot margin on the annual NCF. Moreover, the
annual turnover refers to the manufacturing com-
pany as a whole, while the costs/benets analysis is
focused on a specic DC/retail store; thus, those
costs are not directly comparable.
For manufacturers DC, stock-out costs per
single product sold at the retail store were estimated
as the current turnover loss, turnover loss
c
(h/item),
resulting from products lack at the retail store,
according to the following equation:
turnover loss
c
case value current stock out
number of retail stores number of references:
5
As a result of the questionnaire survey, only the
average value of case and the number of references
ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Bottani, A. Rizzi / Int. J. Production Economics 112 (2008) 548569 563
handled by the DC were available. Thus, the
turnover loss has been expressed as a function of
the number of retail stores in the distribution
channel of the manufacturer and the current level
of stock-out at the retail store. Benets resulting
from stock-out reductions have been computed
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 7
Results of investment evaluation for the FMCG supply chain in integrated scenario with pallet level tagging
Manufacturers DC Years
0 1 2 3 4 5
Discount rate 1 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.82 0.78
Cost savings cost arising
Tagging and labeling 45,000 45,000 45,000, 45,000, 45,000,
Receiving 112,665 112,665 112,665, 112,665, 112,665,
Warehouse management 34,709 34,709 34,709, 34,709, 34,709,
Order picking 12,500 12,500 12,500, 12,500, 12,500,
Shipping 69,780 69,780 69,780, 69,780, 69,780,
Safety stock reduction 267,095 267,095 267,095, 267,095, 267,095,
Total cost/saving 426,749 426,749 426,749 426,749 426,749
Amortization 59,000 59,000 59,000 59,000 59,000
Gross margin 367,749 367,749 367,749 367,749 367,749
Taxes 125,035 125,035 125,035 125,035 125,035
Net prot 242,715 242,715 242,715 242,715 242,715
Investment 324,500 0 0 0 0 0
Net cash ow 324,500 301,715 301,715 301,715 301,715 301,715
Discounted cash ow 324,500 287,347 273,664 260,632 248,221 236,401
Net present value (h) 981,766
Payback period (years) 1.136
Internal rate of return (%) 89.20%
ROI (%) 98%
Distributors DC Years
0 1 2 3 4 5
Discount rate 1 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.82 0.78
Cost savings cost arising
Tagging and labelling
Receiving 304,645 304,645 304,645 304,645 304,645
Warehouse management 52,323 52,323 52,323 52,323 52,323
Order picking 31,500 31,500 31,500 31,500 31,500
Shipping 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000
Safety stock reduction
Total cost/saving 367,468 367,468 367,468 367,468 367,468
Amortization 91,000 91,000 91,000 91,000 91,000
Gross margin 276,468 276,468 276,468 276,468 276,468
Taxes 93,999 93,999 93,999 93,999 93,999
Net prot 182,469 182,469 182,469 182,469 182,469
Investment 500,500 0 0 0 0 0
Net cash ow 500,500 273,469 273,469 273,469 273,469 273,469
Discounted cash ow 500,500 260,446 248,044 236,233 224,983 214,270
Net present value (h) 683,476
Payback period (years) 1.968
Internal rate of return (%) 46.60%
ROI (%) 48%
E. Bottani, A. Rizzi / Int. J. Production Economics 112 (2008) 548569 564
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Retailer Years
0 1 2 3 4 5
Discount rate 1 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.82 0.78
Cost savings cost arising
Tagging and labeling
Receiving 44,673 44,673 44,673 44,673 44,673
Warehouse management 29,880 29,880 29,880 29,880 29,880
Order picking
Shipping
Safety stock reduction
Total cost/saving 74,553 74,553 74,553 74,553 74,553
Amortization 25,720 25,720 25,720 25,720 25,720
Gross margin 48,833 48,833 48,833 48,833 48,833
Taxes 16,603 16,603 16,603 16,603 16,603
Net prot 32,230 32,230 32,230 32,230 32,230
Investment 141,460 0 0 0 0 0
Net cash ow 141,460 57,950 57,950 57,950 57,950 57,950
Discounted cash ow 141,460 55,190 52,562 50,059 47,676 45,405
Net present value (h) 109,433
Payback period (years) 2.673
Internal rate of return (%) 29.90%
ROI (%) 30%
Table 8
Results of investment evaluation for the FMCG supply chain in integrated scenario with case level tagging
Manufacturers DC Years
0 1 2 3 4 5
Discount rate 1 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.82 0.78
Cost savingscost arising
Tagging and labelling 1,489,500 1,489,500 1,489,500 1,489,500 1,489,500
Receiving 112,665 112,665 112,665 112,665 112,665
Warehouse management 34,709 34,709 34,709 34,709 34,709
Order picking 69,681 69,681 69,681 69,681 69,681
Shipping 69,780 69,780 69,780 69,780 69,780
Safety stock reduction 318,043 318,043 318,043 318,043 318,043
Total cost/saving 884,622 884,622 884,622 884,622 884,622
Amortization 69,000 69,000 69,000 69,000 69,000
Gross margin 953,622 953,622 953,622 953,622 953,622
Taxes 0 0 0 0 0
Net prot 953,622 953,622 953,622 953,622 953,622
Investment 379,500 0 0 0 0 0
Net cash ow 379,500 884,622 884,622 884,622 884,622 884,622
Discounted cash ow 379,500 842,497 802,379 764,170 727,781 693,125
Net present value (h) 4,209,452
Payback period (years) 45
Internal rate of return (%)
ROI (%)
Table 7 (continued )
E. Bottani, A. Rizzi / Int. J. Production Economics 112 (2008) 548569 565
assuming stock- out at the retail store to be
improved by 16%, according to the ndings of a
study carried out by the University of Arkansas on
RFID applications on Wal Mart distributive
channel (RFID Journal, October 14, 2005). The
following set of equations was applied for the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Distributors DC Years
0 1 2 3 4 5
Discount rate 1 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.82 0.78
Cost savingscost arising
Tagging and labelling
Receiving 304,645 304,645 304,645 304,645 304,645
Warehouse management 52,323 52,323 52,323 52,323 52,323
Order picking 148,259 148,259 148,259 148,259 148,259
Shipping 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000
Safety stock reduction 64,272 64,272 64,272 64,272 64,272
Total cost/saving 611,499 611,499 611,499 611,499 611,499
Amortization 129,000 129,000 129,000 129,000 129,000
Gross margin 482,499 482,499 482,499 482,499 482,499
Taxes 164,050 164,050 164,050 164,050 164,050
Net prot 318,449 318,449 318,449 318,449 318,449
Investment 709,500 0 0 0 0 0
Net cash ow 709,500 447,449 447,449 447,449 447,449 447,449
Discounted cash ow 709,500 426,142 405,849 386,523 368,117 350,588
Net present value (h) 1,227,720
Payback period (years) 1.698
Internal rate of return (%) 56.30%
ROI (%) 59%
Retailer Years
0 1 2 3 4 5
Discount rate 1 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.82 0.78
Cost savingscost arising
Tagging and labelling
Receiving 44,673 44,673 44,673 44,673 44,673
Warehouse management 29,880 29,880 29,880 29,880 29,880
Order picking 96,222 96,222 96,222 96,222 96,222
Shipping
Safety stock reduction
Total cost/saving 170,775 170,775 170,775 170,775 170,775
Amortization 27,720 27,720 27,720 27,720 27,720
Gross margin 143,055 143,055 143,055 143,055 143,055
Taxes 48,639 48,639 48,639 48,639 48,639
Net prot 94,416 94,416 94,416 94,416 94,416
Investment 152,460 0 0 0 0 0
Net cash ow 152,460 122,136 122,136 122,136 122,136 122,136
Discounted cash ow 152,460 116,320 110,781 105,506 100,482 95,697
Net present value (h) 376,326
Payback period (years) 1.326
Internal rate of return (%) 75.30%
ROI (%) 81%
Table 8 (continued )
E. Bottani, A. Rizzi / Int. J. Production Economics 112 (2008) 548569 566
computation:
benefit of stock out reduction turnover loss
c
turnover loss
e
turnover loss
e
case value expected stock out
number of retail stores number of references
expected stock out current stock out 1 16%. 6
being turnover loss
e
the expected turnover loss when
RFID is adopted. The results obtained for manu-
facturers DC are provided in Fig. 4.
As can be seen from the gure, benets of stock-
out reduction have the potential to signicantly
impact the overall protability of the implementa-
tion. Thus, availability of real-time data becomes a
fundamental issue for manufacturers, to ensure
products to be on the shop oor when required.
EPCglobal network can be regarded as a viable tool
to address this issue, since data available on the
EPCglobal network allow manufacturers to know
precisely what will be needed, when and in which
quantity, preventing products shortage at the retail
store.
A similar computation was performed to quantify
the benets of stock-out reduction for distributors
DC. In this case, turnover loss
c
(h/retail store) at the
retail store has been computed starting from the
service level provided by the retail store and its
annual turnover. For distributors DC, although
stock-out of a product at the shop oor does not
necessarily imply a sell loss, since the customer may
buy an alternative product, we quantify it as a sell
loss because of the poor service level provided. The
following equation has thus been adopted for the
computation:
turnover loss
c
turnover current stock out:
(7)
From data collected, both turnover and the
current stock-out level at the retail store were
directly available. Two different computations were
performed to assess the benets of stock-out
reduction for supermarkets and department stores,
since data can highly vary depending on the type of
retail store examined; for instance, stock-out level
resulted in about 2.75% and 1.5%, respectively, for
supermarkets and department stores. By applying
Eq. (6), benets resulted in about h338,400 and
h38,247 for each department store and supermarket
the distributors DC serves. The overall saving
should be computed taking into account the
distributive network of the distributor, that is, the
number and type of retail stores served.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
3
0
0
4
0
0
5
0
0
6
0
0
7
0
0
8
0
0
9
0
0
1
0
0
0
0.00%
1.00%
2.00%
3.00%
4.00%
5.00%
6.00%
7.00%
8.00%
9.00%
Number of retail stores served
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
s
t
o
c
k
-
o
u
t
950.00 1000.00
900.00 950.00
850.00 900.00
800.00 850.00
750.00 800.00
700.00 750.00
650.00 700.00
600.00 650.00
550.00 600.00
500.00 550.00
450.00 500.00
400.00 450.00
350.00 400.00
300.00 350.00
250.00 300.00
200.00 250.00
150.00 200.00
100.00 150.00
50.00 100.00
- 50.00
Fig. 4. Economical impact of stock-out reduction (16%) for manufacturers DC as a function of current stock-out level at the retail store
and number of retail stores served, for a single item sold at the retail store.
E. Bottani, A. Rizzi / Int. J. Production Economics 112 (2008) 548569 567
On the ground of these results, it can be stated
that substantial benets in terms of stock-out
reductions can be reached in an integrated
scenario for both manufacturers and distribu-
tors DCs. Consequently, the implementation of
RFID, EPC standards and EPCglobal network
emerges as a viable tool for improving integration
of supply-chain partners, allowing real-time data
availability and sharing through the supply chain.
RFID tags can be regarded as a means to enhance
supply-chain integration, since costs of tags can be
balanced by benets achievable, thanks to real-time
data availability, which cannot be provided using
traditional barcodes. Specically, outcomes of the
integrated scenario show that benets of reduced
stock-out and safety stocks could overcome costs
for purchasing RFID tags for manufacturers DC,
once tag costs should fall below the estimated
break-even points. This outcome may provide an
economical justication to the adoption of the
RFID technology for FMCG supply-chain partners
in the case-level tagging.
5. Conclusions
The nal results of the research described in this
paper are provided in Table 9.
As a result of the investment analysis, the
following conclusions can be drawn. In a non-
integrated scenario, the introduction of RFID in a
pallet-level tagging scenario provides positive NPV
for all echelons examined. Manufacturers DCs, in
particular, are affected by the highest benets.
Conversely, the case-level tagging scenario generates
opposite results. Specically, substantial costs arise
for manufacturers DC, mainly due to tags costs; as
a result, negative NPV emerges. Conversely, high
benets can be achieved by retail stores and
distributors DC, which do not uphold costs for
purchasing RFID tags. In this scenario, the break
even cost of RFID tags has been estimated as
about 1.45 ch/tag.
When an integrated perspective is examined,
visibility due to EPCglobal network and data
sharing bring in additional benets for both
manufacturer and distributor. Benets are related
to safety stock reduction at the DC as a conse-
quence of the attening of the bullwhip effect, and
to turnover improvement because of stock-out
reduction.
In the case-level tagging scenario, benets differ
depending on the supply-chain player examined.
For manufacturers DC, benets achievable in
terms of safety stocks reduction do not compensate
the high cost of tagging; as a result, high negative
NPV emerges. Conversely, both distributors DC
and retailer experience increased benets, which
provide improvements in the nal NPV.
Although prots and losses are not balanced for
manufacturers DC, numerical results show that
benets obtained in terms of safety stocks reduction
have potential to provide an economical justication
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 9
Final results of the research
Manufacturers DC Distributors DC Retailer
Non integrated scenario Pallet level tagging NPV (h) h218,554 h40,549 h11,648
IRR (%) 26.90% 7.90% 8.00%
PBP (years) 2.84 4.59 4.58
ROI (%) 26.86% 8.90% 8.94%
Case level tagging NPV (h) h5,586,412 h401,139 h278,541
IRR (%) 0.00% 23.70% 58.80%
PBP (years) 45 3.05 1.64
ROI (%) 23.58% 61.81%
Integrated scenario Pallet level tagging NPV (h) h981,766 h683,476 h109,433
IRR (%) 89.20% 46.60% 29.90%
PBP (years) 1.14 1.97 2.67
ROI (%) 98.13% 47.83% 29.89%
Case level tagging NPV (h) h4,209,452 h1,227,720 h376,326
IRR (%) 0.00% 56.30% 75.30%
PBP (years) 45 1.70 1.33
ROI (%) 58.89% 81.25%
E. Bottani, A. Rizzi / Int. J. Production Economics 112 (2008) 548569 568
to the introduction of RFID and EPC even in the
case-level tagging scenario. More specically, a tag
cost of about 3.5 ch could balance prots and losses
for the manufacturers DC.
While all benets related to RFID and EPCglobal
network have been computed on the ground of
existing literature, future researches will be ad-
dressed to the development of an RFID Lab where
all supply-chain processes mapped and reengineered
in this research will be full-scale replicated. Experi-
mental campaigns will determine how and to what
extent potential saving for each process and for each
supply-chain partner could be achieved. When this
paper was submitted, the project of a 150 m
2
facility
was going to be carried out and potential stake-
holders were recruited.
Acknowledgements
Our thanks goes to GS1 Italy, which has
supported this research, and to Auchan, Campari,
Carrefour, Finiper, Heineken, LOre al, Nestle ,
Nordiconad, Pam, Procter&Gamble, Sony for the
paramount collaboration and commitment to this
research.
References
Agarwal, V., 2001. Assessing the Benets of Auto-ID Technology
in the Consumer Goods Industry. Cambridge University,
Auto-ID Center. Available at /http://www.autoidlabs.org.
uk/camwhitepapers.htmlS, accessed July 2005.
Auto-ID Center, 2002. Technology Guide. Cambridge Uni-
versity, Auto-ID Center. Available at /http://interval.hu-berlin.
de/downloads/rd/technologische%20grundlagen/Technology_
Guide.pdfS, accessed July 2005.
Boxall, G., 2000. The use of RFID for retail supply chain
logistics. Paper presented at the Tag 2000, Baltic Conven-
tions. The Commonwealth Conference & Events Centre,
London, 24 May.
Burnell, J., 1999. Users will overcome many obstacles and imple-
ment RFID, study predicts. Automatic ID News 15 (5), 26.
Bushnell, R., 2000. RFIDs wide range of possibilities. Modern
Materials Handling 55 (1), 37.
Bylinsky, G., 2000. Hot new technologies for American factories.
Fortune 142 (1), 288A288K.
Byrne, P.J., Heavey, C., 2006. The impact of information sharing
and forecasting in capacitated industrial supply chains: A case
study. International Journal of Production Economics 103,
420437.
Chen, F., Drezner, Z., Ryan, J.K., Simchi-Levi, D., 2000.
Quantifying the bullwhip effect in a simple supply chain:
The impact of forecasting, lead time, and information.
Management Science 46 (3), 436443.
EPC Global, 2004. The EPCglobal Network
TM
: overview of
design, benets and security. Available at /http://www.
epcglobalinc.orgS, accessed July 2006.
Fernie, J., 1994. Quick response: An international perspective.
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management 24 (6), 3846.
Hammer, M., Champy, C., 1993. Reengineering the Corporation.
Harper Business, New York.
Harrison, M., 2004. EPC Information Service. In: Proceeding of
the Auto-ID Labs Research Workshop, September 2324.
University of St. Gallen, Switzerland. Available at /http://
www.m-lab.ch/auto-idS, accessed July 2006.
Jones, L., 1999. Working without wires. Industrial Distribution
88 (8), M6M9.
Jones, P., Clarke-Hill, C., Shears, P., Comfort, D., Hillier, D.,
2004. Radio frequency identication in the UK: Opportu-
nities and challenges. International Journal of Retail and
Distribution Management 32 (3), 164171.
Karkkainen, M., 2003. Increasing efciency in the supply chain
for short shelf life goods using RFID tagging. International
Journal of Retail and Distribution Management 31 (3),
529536.
Karkkainen, M., Holmstrom, J., 2002. Wireless product identi-
cation: Enabler for handling efciency, customization and
information sharing. Supply Chain Management: An Inter-
national Journal 7 (4), 242252.
McFarlane, D., 2002. Auto-ID based control. White Paper,
Cambridge University, Auto-ID Center. Available at /http://
www.autoidlabs.org.uk/camwhitepapers.htmlS, accessed July
2005.
Moore, B., 1999. Barcode or RFID: Which will win the high
speed sortation race? Automatic ID News 15 (7), 2936.
Niemeyer, A., Pak, M.H., Ramaswamy, S.E., 2003. Smart tag for
your supply chain. The McKinsey Quarterly 4, 68.
Ollivier, M., 1995. RFID enhances materials handling. Sensor
Review 15 (1), 3639.
Prater, E., Frazier, G.V., Reyes, P.M., 2005. Future impacts of
RFID on e-supply chains in grocery retailing. Supply Chain
Management: An International Journal 10 (2), 134142.
RFID Journal, May 2005. Understanding the EPC Gen 2
Protocol, Special Report.
RFID Journal, October 14, 2005. EPC reduces out-of-stocks at
Wal Mart.
RFID Journal, September 15, 2005. Alien Drops Tag Price to
12.9 Cents.
Riso, F., 2001. Intelligent chip technologyan RFID update.
Paper presented at the Intelligent Supply Chain, CIES, The
Food Business Forum, Hotel Okura, Amsterdam, 45
October.
UCCnet, 2005. The Global Data Synchronization Network
(GDSN). Available at /http://www.uccnet.org/GDSN/
GDSN_2-9-05.pdfS, accessed January 2006.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Bottani, A. Rizzi / Int. J. Production Economics 112 (2008) 548569 569