Bullwhip effect
The bullwhip effect is a phenomenon in supply chain management where small changes in consumer demand lead to larger fluctuations in orders placed upstream, impacting suppliers and manufacturers. Named due to its analogy to the cracking of a bullwhip, this effect illustrates how minor shifts in demand ripple through the supply chain, often resulting in excessive inventory or shortages. Originating from research by Jay Wright Forrester in the 1960s, it was later popularized by experts at Procter and Gamble, who observed significant demand variance in baby diaper sales.
Factors contributing to the bullwhip effect include demand fluctuations, overestimation of safety stock, order batching, and shortage gaming. For example, a slight increase in consumer purchases can lead retailers to order much more from distributors to avoid stockouts, which in turn causes disproportionate increases in orders placed with manufacturers. This cascade can lead to inefficiencies, such as backlogged orders and unpredictable work schedules. To mitigate the bullwhip effect, businesses can enhance inventory management practices, utilize point-of-sale monitoring, and adopt "just in time" production strategies to align production more closely with actual demand. Understanding and addressing the bullwhip effect is crucial for maintaining a balanced and efficient supply chain.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Bullwhip effect
The bullwhip effect is a phenomenon experienced by businesses involved in any aspect of producing or selling products. The phenomenon refers to the way small changes in demand by the consumer result in increasingly larger changes up the supply chain, affecting even those suppliers that provide the raw materials needed in production. It addresses a perennial problem that can result in excessive inventory or shortages at various points in the supply chain. The effect has a number of causes, and can usually be overcome by enhanced point of service sales monitoring and inventory management techniques. It is considered by many to be the single most important theory about supply chain management.

Background
The bullwhip effect gets its name from the similarity between the action of the cracking of a literal bullwhip and the way small changes at the consumer level can cause increasing ripples of effect up the supply chain. The small action of a person cracking a whip causes the whip to form waves that increase in effect until they reach the tip. In the same way, the small changes in demand by customers cause increasing waves all the way to the supplier of raw materials at the top of the supply chain.
The concept originated from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) systems scientist and professor Jay Wright Forrester in his 1961 book Industrial Dynamics. Forrester never used the term bullwhip effect, however. The name was given by logistics experts at Procter and Gamble Corporation (P&G) sometime later. The P&G employees were studying the sales and ordering history for baby diapers and observed the effect at work. They noted that even when consumer demand for diapers changed only slightly, the resulting fluctuations in demand at the distributor level were greater than expected. These differences increased all the way to the level of the orders for the various materials used to make the diapers.
The P&G logistics experts dubbed this phenomenon the bullwhip effect. Although it had been identified in 1961, it was not until 1997 that it was popularized by college professor Hau L. Lee and his colleagues in journal articles. The phenomenon is also known by a number of other names, including the Forrester effect, after the man who first described it. Other names for the phenomenon include the whiplash or whipsaw effect and the demand amplification effect.
Overview
The bullwhip effect is an important concept in supply chain management. Supply chain is the term used for the series of steps and companies between the materials used to make an item and the person or other entity that ultimately buys it. For example, the supply chain for a piece of paper would include the lumbering company that cuts down the trees, the plant that processes the wood into pulp, the plant that turns the pulp into paper, the distributor that sells the paper to the office supply store, and the customer who buys the paper.
The effect occurs when there are greater variations in the supplies ordered along the chain than can be accounted for by the purchases at the customer level. For instance, the customer at the office supply store buys three packs of paper; the entire supply needed to meet customer demand is, therefore, three packs. The office supply store then orders five packs of paper to restock to ensure it has enough for future customers. The distributor serves five office supply stores, so it orders twenty-five packs, so it has enough if all its customers order five packs. The plant that turns the pulp into paper gets this order, but it is not feasible to make just twenty-five packs to fill this order, so the plant processes enough to make five hundred packs. It orders more pulp to meet this order, which requires the company that provides the pulp to request more trees. To meet the minimum order, it has to order enough trees to process five thousand packs of paper.
This is a simplified version of the effect because each step along the supply chain very likely has more customers than just the ones included here. However, the concept remains the same: There can be wild variations in how much of an item is produced or ordered in relation to how much customers want.
Experts identify a number of reasons why this effect occurs. One reason can be fluctuations in demand at the customer level. This can be caused by personal preferences, aversion to risk, changes in the market, and a number of other factors. For example, customers may purchase more paper during back-to-school time and comparatively little the rest of the year. If order projections are based on the peak orders in August and September, too much inventory can result.
Another cause can be the overestimation of how much safety stock, or reserve inventory, the company wants on hand. Companies know it is bad for business when they cannot meet customer demand, and this may prompt them to over order. Order batching, or holding orders until the end of a week or month before sending them up the supply chain, can also contribute to the bullwhip effect. Companies do this for various reasons, including convenience, to take advantage of bulk discounts, and to save on transportation costs. Batching can artificially inflate expectations at the next supply level for how much will be needed and result in excess ordering. Another factor can be a technique called shortage gaming. If a company knows an item is in short supply and it is likely to only get half of what it needs, the company may order twice as much to ensure it gets an adequate supply to meet its customers' demand. The next step in the supply chain produces more merchandise based on the larger order, which is not really needed and results in excesses.
The bullwhip effect can cause a number of consequences. In addition to excessive inventory that needs to be liquidated at low prices, it can result in backlogged orders, unpredictable work schedules for employees in the manufacturing process as orders fluctuate, missed sales because of lack of merchandise, and price increases because of inflated demand. The effect can be minimized by maintaining good inventory control through point of sales systems, using historic trends instead of current demand to guide ordering, and implementing "just in time" production techniques that produce just the amount of merchandise that has been ordered.
An example of the bullwhip effect occurred in the early 2020s amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Panicked consumers bought excessive amounts of toilet paper, with some experts estimating the increase to be six to eight times its normal level. As stores sold out, they ordered more and manufacturers increased their production to meet demand. However, the demand was a temporary fluctuation in consumer behavior, and when consumption returned to its normal level, manufacturers had to adjust their workforce and raw materials ordering.
Bibliography
"Bullwhip Effect: Example, Causes, and Impact on Supply Chain." Inbound Logistics, July 2023, www.inboundlogistics.com/articles/bullwhip-effect. Accessed 29 Dec. 2024.
"Bullwhip Effect: Meaning, Example, Impact." Investopedia, 3 May 2024, www.investopedia.com/bullwhip-effect-definition-5499228. Accessed 29 Dec. 2024.
"Jay W. Forrester 1918–2016." Supply Chain Management Research, 11 Nov. 2016, scmresearch.org/2016/11/21/jay-w-forrester-1918-2016. Accessed 29 Dec. 2024.
Kowalczyk, Anna. "Forrester's Effect. Bullwhip Effect." World Scientific News, vol. 78, 2017, pp. 209–12.
Lee, Hau L., et al. "The Bullwhip Effect in Supply Chains." MIT Sloan Management Review, spring 1997, vol. 38, no. 3, sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-bullwhip-effect-in-supply-chains. Accessed 29 Dec. 2024.
Lindner, Brian. "Six Strategies: How to Reduce the Bullwhip Effect in Supply Chains." True Commerce, 28 Mar. 2024, www.truecommerce.com/blog/six-strategies-how-to-reduce-the-bullwhip-effect-in-supply-chains. Accessed 29 Dec. 2024.
McHale, Patrick. "Michael Burry of ‘The Big Short’ Fame Warns Fed May Alter Course." Bloomberg, 27 June 2022, www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-27/michael-burry-of-the-big-short-fame-warns-fed-may-alter-course. Accessed 29 Dec. 2024.
Richason IV, Owen E. "How to Reduce the Bullwhip Effect." Houston Chronicle, smallbusiness.chron.com/reduce-bullwhip-effect-3908.html. Accessed 29 Dec. 2024.
"What Is the Bullwhip Effect? Understanding the Concept & Definition." Adaptalift Hyster, 2 Apr. 2012, www.aalhysterforklifts.com.au/index.php/about/blog-post/what‗is‗the‗bullwhip‗effect‗understanding‗the‗concept‗definition. Accessed 29 Dec. 2024.
Yang, Y., et al. “The Behavioural Causes of Bullwhip Effect in Supply Chains: A Systematic Literature Review.” International Journal of Production Economics, vol. 236, 2021, doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108120. Accessed 29 Dec. 2024.