File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: When does it pay to delay supplier qualification? Theory and experiments

TitleWhen does it pay to delay supplier qualification? Theory and experiments
Authors
KeywordsSupplier qualification
Experiments
Procurement auctions
Issue Date2012
Citation
Management Science, 2012, v. 58, n. 11, p. 2057-2075 How to Cite?
AbstractWe study a procurement setting in which the buyer seeks a low price but will not allocate the contract to a supplier who has not passed qualification screening. Qualification screening is costly for the buyer, involving product tests, site visits, and interviews. In addition to a qualified incumbent supplier, the buyer has an entrant of unknown qualification. The buyer wishes to run a price-only, open-descending reverse auction between the incumbent and the entrant, and faces a strategic choice about whether to perform qualification screening on the entrant before or after the auction. We analytically study the buyer's optimal strategy, accounting for the fact that under postauction qualification, the incumbent knows he could lose the auction but still win the contract. In our analysis, we derive the incumbent's optimal bidding strategy under postauction qualification and find that he follows a threshold structure in which high-cost incumbents hold back on bidding-or even boycott the auction-to preserve their profit margin, and only lower-cost incumbents bid to win. These results are strikingly different from the usual open-descending auction analysis where all bidders are fully qualified and bidding to win is always a dominant strategy. We test our analytical results in the laboratory, with human subjects. We find that qualitatively our theoretical predictions hold up quite well, although incumbent suppliers bid somewhat more aggressively than the theory predicts, making buyers more inclined to use postauction qualification. © 2012 INFORMS.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/280189
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 4.6
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 5.438
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWan, Zhixi-
dc.contributor.authorBeil, Damian R.-
dc.contributor.authorKatok, Elena-
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-06T02:07:38Z-
dc.date.available2020-01-06T02:07:38Z-
dc.date.issued2012-
dc.identifier.citationManagement Science, 2012, v. 58, n. 11, p. 2057-2075-
dc.identifier.issn0025-1909-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/280189-
dc.description.abstractWe study a procurement setting in which the buyer seeks a low price but will not allocate the contract to a supplier who has not passed qualification screening. Qualification screening is costly for the buyer, involving product tests, site visits, and interviews. In addition to a qualified incumbent supplier, the buyer has an entrant of unknown qualification. The buyer wishes to run a price-only, open-descending reverse auction between the incumbent and the entrant, and faces a strategic choice about whether to perform qualification screening on the entrant before or after the auction. We analytically study the buyer's optimal strategy, accounting for the fact that under postauction qualification, the incumbent knows he could lose the auction but still win the contract. In our analysis, we derive the incumbent's optimal bidding strategy under postauction qualification and find that he follows a threshold structure in which high-cost incumbents hold back on bidding-or even boycott the auction-to preserve their profit margin, and only lower-cost incumbents bid to win. These results are strikingly different from the usual open-descending auction analysis where all bidders are fully qualified and bidding to win is always a dominant strategy. We test our analytical results in the laboratory, with human subjects. We find that qualitatively our theoretical predictions hold up quite well, although incumbent suppliers bid somewhat more aggressively than the theory predicts, making buyers more inclined to use postauction qualification. © 2012 INFORMS.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofManagement Science-
dc.subjectSupplier qualification-
dc.subjectExperiments-
dc.subjectProcurement auctions-
dc.titleWhen does it pay to delay supplier qualification? Theory and experiments-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1287/mnsc.1120.1539-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84870174189-
dc.identifier.volume58-
dc.identifier.issue11-
dc.identifier.spage2057-
dc.identifier.epage2075-
dc.identifier.eissn1526-5501-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000311091900006-
dc.identifier.issnl0025-1909-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats