Push or Pull? Auctioning Supply Contracts

Consider a buyer, facing uncertain demand, who sources from multiple suppliers via online procurement auctions (open descending price‐only auctions). The suppliers have heterogeneous production costs, which are private information, and the winning supplier has to invest in production capacity before the demand uncertainty is resolved. The buyer chooses to offer a push or pull contract, for which the single price and winning supplier are determined via the auction. We show that, with a pull contract, the buyer does not necessarily benefit from a larger number of suppliers participating in the auction, due to the negative effect of supplier competition on the incentive of supplier capacity investment. We thus propose an enhanced pull mechanism that mitigates this effect with a floor price. We then analyze and compare the outcomes of auctions for push and (enhanced) pull contracts, establishing when one form is preferred over the other based on the buyer's profits. We also compare our simple, price‐only push and pull contract auctions to the optimal mechanisms, benchmarking the performance of the simple mechanisms as well as establishing the relative importance of auction design and contract design in procurement auctions.     

An Analysis of Scoring and Buyer‐Determined Procurement Auctions

In procurement auctions, the object for sale is a contract, bidders are suppliers, and the bid taker is a buyer. The suppliers bidding for the contract are usually the current supplier (the incumbent) and a group of potential new suppliers (the entrants). As the buyer has an ongoing relationship with the incumbent, he needs to adjust the bids of the entrants to include non‐price attributes, such as the switching costs. The buyer can run a scoring auction, in which suppliers compete on the adjusted bids or scores, or, he can run a buyer‐determined auction, in which suppliers compete on the price, and the buyer adjusts a certain number of the bids with the non‐price attributes after the auction to determine the winner. Unless the incumbent has a significant cost advantage over the entrants, I find that the scoring auction yields a lower average cost for the buyer, if the non‐price attributes are available. If the non‐price attributes are difficult or expensive to obtain, the buyer could run a buyer‐determined auction adjusting only the lowest price bid.     

基于Cobb-Douglas效用函数的多属性采购拍卖

在多属性采购拍卖的实践中,利润和赢得合同对供给者来说具有不同的重要性.假设供给者使用Cobb-Douglas效用函数对利润和赢得合同的重要性程度进行权衡,在第一评分拍卖及第二评分拍卖下获得了供给者的均衡投标策略和采购者的期望效用,并对采购者的期望效用进行了比较.结果表明供给者对被采购物品的质量选择只与自己的成本参数和打分函数有关;当供给者越看重获取采购合同,采购者的期望效用越高;当采购者只能使用效用函数打分时,如果供给者更看重利润,采购者应该采用第二评分拍卖节约采购成本,否则使用第一评分拍卖.     

具有高投标成本的多属性逆向拍卖博弈模型

越来越多像GE这样的大型企业在利用多属性逆向拍卖选择新的供应商采购产品时,通常会设定较高的固定投标成本。针对此情况,建立了三阶段的非合作博弈模型,并利用求解子博弈纳什均衡策略的方法,推导出了供应商的最优投标价格。并得到以下两个主要结论:一是供应商的最优投标策略是按照生产产品真实的质量和交货期进行投标,且投标价格为最优投标价格;二是采购商的最优策略是选择投标价格最高的供应商作为拍卖获胜者,这一违反直觉的结论。这是合理的,因为投标价格最高的供应商也是类型最优的供应商,也即投标质量和投标交货期组合最优的供应商。最后,利用数值实验验证了模型的有效性,并显示出设定相对较高的固定投标成本对采购商来说是有利的。     

不完全信息采购环境下的供应链协调问题： 拍卖机制的应用

本文研究了不完全信息采购环境下供应链的协调问题.拍卖不仅是一种价格确定机制,它也可以作为一种供应链协调的机制.文献已经证明拍卖机制对于参与方的收益及整条供应链的有效性具有显著影响.本文研究了当市场中存在n个供应商1个买者的情形下,拍卖环境满足独立私人值(IPV)条件、且市场反需求函数为对数函数时,批发价格拍卖、目录拍卖及二部合同拍卖为各方所产生的期望收入,并且证明了批发价格拍卖和目录拍卖不能实现渠道协调,而在拥有信息中介的二部合同拍卖机制下系统可以达到渠道协调.     

Do Auction Parameters Affect Buyer Surplus in E‐Auctions for Procurement?

Although the initial euphoria about Internet‐enabled reverse auctions has given way to a cautious but widespread use of reverse auctions in business‐to‐business (B2B) procurement, there is a limited understanding of the effect of auction design parameters on buyer surplus. In this paper, we study the effect of bidding competition, information asymmetry, reserve price, bid decrement, auction duration, and bidder type on buyer surplus. We collected field data on more than 700 online procurement auctions conducted by a leading auctioneer and involving procurement items worth millions of dollars. Consistent with the predictions of auction theory, the results indicate that bidding competition, reserve price, and information sharing affect buyer surplus. Unlike previous findings in the consumer‐to‐consumer context, we find that bid decrement and auction duration have no effect in B2B procurement auctions. Our results suggest that use of the rank‐bidding format increases buyer surplus when incumbent suppliers participate in the auction. We discuss the theoretical and managerial implications of these findings for future research and for optimal design of online procurement auctions.     

多物品最优组合供应模式确定问题的模型研究

电子商务B2B反向拍卖采购模式能够为采购方在价格竞争条件下提供更广泛的产品和服务,因此这种采购模式将会更加灵活.本文首先提出了电子商务B2B采购合同的反向组合拍卖机制,然后建立了反向组合拍卖的多物品最优组合供应模式确定问题的数学模型,并设计了求解该模型的两级优化算法,最后以应用实例说明了模型的普适性和算法的有效性.     

应用拍卖机制协调供应链

拍卖不仅是种价格确定机制,也可以作为供应链的协调机制.论文研究不完全信息的采购环境下,通过应用合理的拍卖机制来协调买者与供应商之间的关系分析供应链的协调问题.分析了当有n个供应商1个买者的独立私人值环境下且市场反需求函数为二次函数时,批发价格拍卖、目录拍卖及二部合同拍卖3种机制为各方所产生的期望收入,并证明了在拥有信息中介的二部合同拍卖机制下系统可以达到渠道协调.     

Reverse Auctions to Innovate Procurement Processes: Effects of Bid Information Presentation Design on a Supplier's Bidding Outcome

Information technologies (ITs) are being used to innovate various procurement processes. This research study focuses on the supplier‐side effects of IT design choices to conduct reverse auctions, which are increasingly used to procure a wide range of products and services. IT–enabled reverse auctions enhance supplier participation across geographical boundaries, leading to more efficient pricing. However, there are growing concerns about the adverse effects of IT–enabled reverse auctions on a supplier's performance. Supplier‐side issues are gaining prominence in the reverse auction literature and are critical for the long‐term success of reverse auctions. Therefore, we focus on suppliers’ bidding outcomes and assess how the design of an IT–enabled reverse auction facilitates the auction bidding outcomes of participating suppliers. Specifically, we examine the effects of two types of bid information presentation design—full price visibility and partial price visibility—on supplier's auction bidding outcomes, across auctions with different cost certainty and suppliers bargaining power vis‐à‐vis the buyer. The results of this study contribute new knowledge about the ways to use IT for creating effective auction designs and innovating procurement through auctions to enhance both the buyer's and suppliers’ performance. We present the detailed theoretical contributions of our study and discuss the managerial implications for designers of reverse auctions.      

Flexibility or Cost Saving? Sourcing Decisions with Two Suppliers

This article studies a decentralized supply chain in which there are two suppliers and a single buyer. One supplier offers the quantity flexibility (QF) contract to the buyer, while the other offers the cheaper price. Under the QF contract, the buyer does not assume full responsibility for the forecast, yet the supplier guarantees the availability of the forecasted quantity with additional buffer inventory. On the other hand, the price‐only contract places full inventory burden on the buyer, but with a cheaper price. We study this problem from the buyer's perspective and solve for the buyer's optimal procurement and forecasting decisions. We identify areas where flexibility and cheaper price have an advantage, one over the other. Our results indicate that the buyer significantly benefits from having multiple sources of supply. We also find that, from the system's standpoint, a multisupplier system may outperform a single‐supplier supply chain under certain conditions. Interestingly, we observe that providing too much flexibility may benefit the low‐price supplier rather than benefiting the QF supplier. We discuss the managerial implications and provide directions for future research opportunities.     

多部件采购外包的两阶段均衡投标策略

本文考虑一个由单个制造商和多个供应商群体组成的供应链——该制造商需要采购多个部件,对于每个部件在市场上均存在多个供应商。不同于传统的从各供应商群体分别采购各个部件,制造商考虑将所有部件的采购整体外包给某个供应商。在第一阶段,制造商使用一级价格密封投标的逆向拍卖来确定赢得整体采购合约的供应商。接下来,第一阶段投标的获胜者生产其所能供应的部件,并使用逆向拍卖向第一阶段中未获胜的其他竞标者采购其余部件。我们分析了供应商在两个阶段的均衡竞价策略,并比较了制造商在亲自逐件采购和外包整体采购两种情况下的期望采购成本。我们证明了在两种机制下制造商的总的期望采购成本相等。     

逆向选择下供应链业务外包中的最优合约配置

研究了委托人(业务购买方)对于承包人(业务供应方)生产成本具有非对称信息时的最优合约设计问题.基于委托人视角,给出了委托人如何诱导代理人报告自己真实成本信息的逆向选择模型,并刻画了最优合约的特征.结果表明:给出的合约能够达到诱导代理人讲真话的目的;在信息非对称条件下,委托人由于信息缺乏受到了损失,而低成本类型的代理人获得了额外的信息租金;在非对称信息条件下,最优合约的参数配置受到委托人事前信念的影响.     

价格柔性合同下的原材料采购策略及风险分析

为了降低原材料价格波动给采购-供应双方企业带来的风险,供应链企业通常采用签订价格合同的方式来共同分担原材料价格波动的风险。本文通过设计价格柔性合同,利用Stackelberg主从博弈模型研究了由一个供应商和一个制造商组成的采购系统的最优采购策略及原材料价格波动风险的分担机制。研究表明,通过实施价格柔性合同可以降低供应双方的风险,且通过设置合理的价格柔性系数可以提高双方的收益。     

卖方边际成本可变的多物品多属性逆向拍卖研究

研究卖方边际成本可变的多物品多属性逆向拍卖问题。首先,根据卖方边际成本可变的特点设计了一种多轮逆向拍卖机制;其次,基于近视最佳反应策略的基本假设,分析卖方的投标策略;最后,利用仿真实验方法,研究买方事先公布估价信息对拍卖的影响。基本结果是:本拍卖机制在多数情况下是有效率的;相对买方不公布估价信息的拍卖机制,买方事先公布估价信息的多物品多属性拍卖具有稍差的市场效率,但能够显著地提高拍卖收敛速度。     

Optimal procurement of long-term contracts in the presence of imperfect spot market

B2B spot market has grown rapidly and become an effective trading channel for commodity products. Besides long-term contract procurement from conventional suppliers (forward and option), a buyer can procure or sell commodities at any time in B2B spot market to adjust her inventory level. However, spot prices are generally volatile and the market is imperfect in the sense that spot trading may be realized with uncertainty in a given period of time and often comes with extra transaction cost. This paper considers a commodity buyer who can order forward and option contracts in advance and trade in a B2B spot market when spot price and demand are observed stochastically. Based on a single-period newsvendor model, we discuss three optimal order strategies and derive respective expected profits when the buyer is risk-neutral. The sensitivity of purchase costs, market liquidity and transaction cost is investigated. We also compare the optimal expected profits for different strategies to illustrate the effects of the two long-term contracts in the presence of the B2B spot market. We then extend our model to a multi-period setting and derive the optimal strategy. Finally, we numerically compute the optimal order strategy for a risk-averse buyer and analyze the impact of spot market, risk aversion, as well as the correlation between customer demand and spot price.     

Mechanisms to Induce Buyer Forecasting: Do Suppliers Always Benefit from Better Forecasting?

In this study, we consider a supplier's contract offerings to a buyer who may obtain improved forecasts for her demand over time. We investigate how the supplier can take advantage of the buyer's better forecasts and what kind of contracts he should offer to the buyer in order to maximize his profits. We model a natural forecast evolution where the buyer can obtain a more accurate forecast closer to the selling season. We assume there is information asymmetry between the buyer and the supplier at all times in that the buyer understands her demand better than the supplier. Three types of contracts that the supplier can offer are considered: (1) one where a contract is offered before the buyer has a chance to obtain improved forecasts, (2) one where a contract is offered after the buyer has obtained improved forecasts, and (3) a contingent (dynamic) contract which offers an initial contract to the buyer before she obtains improved forecasts, followed by a later contract (contingent on the initial contract) offered after improved forecasts have been obtained. We consider two scenarios: (1) where the supplier is certain that the buyer can obtain more accurate forecasts over time, and (2) where the supplier is uncertain about the buyer's forecasting capability (or forecasting cost). In the first scenario, we show that among the three types of contracts, the contingent contract is always the most profitable for the supplier. Furthermore, using the contingent contract, the supplier always benefits from higher accuracy of the buyer's demand forecasts. In the second scenario, we explicitly model the supplier's level of certainty about the buyer's capability of obtaining better forecasts, and explore how the supplier can design contracts to induce the buyer to obtain better forecasts when she is capable.     

Optimal Descending Mechanisms for Constrained Procurement

Descending mechanisms for procurement (or, ascending mechanisms for selling) have been well‐recognized for their simplicity from the viewpoint of bidders—they require less bidder sophistication as compared to sealed‐bid mechanisms. In this study, we consider procurement under each of two types of constraints: (1) Individual/Group Capacities: limitations on the amounts that can be sourced from individual and/or subsets of suppliers, and (2) Business Rules: lower and upper bounds on the number of suppliers to source from, and on the amount that can be sourced from any single supplier. We analyze two procurement problems, one that incorporates individual/group capacities and another that incorporates business rules. In each problem, we consider a buyer who wants to procure a fixed quantity of a product from a set of suppliers, where each supplier is endowed with a privately known constant marginal cost. The buyer's objective is to minimize her total expected procurement cost. For both problems, we present descending auction mechanisms that are optimal mechanisms. We then show that these two problems belong to a larger class of mechanism design problems with constraints specified by polymatroids, for which we prove that optimal mechanisms can be implemented as descending mechanisms.     

Supply Contract Design for Competing Heterogeneous Suppliers under Asymmetric Information

This study considers a supply chain with two heterogeneous suppliers and a common retailer whose type is either low‐volume or high‐volume. The retailer's type is unknown to the suppliers. The flexible supplier has a high variable cost and a low fixed cost, while the efficient supplier has a low variable cost and a high fixed cost. Each supplier offers the retailer a menu of contracts. The retailer chooses the contract that maximizes its expected profit. For this setting, we characterize the equilibrium contract menus offered by the suppliers to the retailer. We find that the equilibrium contract menus depend on which supplier–retailer match can generate the highest supply chain profit and on how much information rent the supplier may need to pay. An important feature of the equilibrium contract menus is that the contract assigned to the more profitable retailer will coordinate the supply chain, while the contract assigned to the less profitable retailer may not. In addition, in some circumstances, the flexible supplier may choose not to serve the high‐volume retailer, in order to avoid excessive information rent.     

Complexity as a Contract Design Factor: A Human‐to‐Human Experimental Study

Despite being theoretically suboptimal, simpler contracts (such as price‐only contracts and quantity discount contracts with limited number of price blocks) are commonly preferred in practice. Thus, exploring the tension between theory and practice regarding complexity and performance in contract design is especially relevant. Using human subject experiments, Kalkancı et al. (2011) showed that such simpler contracts perform effectively for a supplier interacting with a computerized buyer under asymmetric demand information. We use a similar set of experiments with the modification that a human supplier interacts with a human buyer. We show that human interactions strengthen the supplier's preference for simpler contracts. We find that suppliers have fairness concerns even when they interact with computerized buyers. These fairness concerns tend to be even stronger when suppliers interact with human buyers, particularly when the complexity of the contract is low. We also find that suppliers are more prone to random decision errors (i.e., bounded rationality) when interacting with human buyers. In the absence of social preferences, Kalkancı et al. identified reinforcement and bounded rationality as key biases that impact suppliers' decisions. In human‐to‐human experiments, we find evidence for social preference effects. However, these effects may be secondary to bounded rationality.     

Increasing Revenue by Decreasing Information in Procurement Auctions

We report on results of several laboratory experiments that investigate on‐line procurement auctions in which suppliers bid on price, but exogenous bidder quality affects winner determination. In procurement auctions, bidder quality may or may not be publicly known to all bidders, and the effect of this quality transparency on the auction outcome is one aspect of auction design that we examine. The second aspect of auction design that we examine is the effect of price visibility on the auction outcome, and the interaction between price visibility and quality transparency. In terms of price visibility, we consider two extreme cases: the sealed bid request for proposals (RFPs), and the open‐bid dynamic auction event. In terms of bidder quality transparency, we also consider two extreme cases: a setting in which bidder qualities are publicly known and the case in which they are private. We find that in our laboratory experiments, the RFP format is consistent in generating higher buyer surplus levels than does the open‐bid dynamic format. This advantage is independent of the quality transparency. In contrast, the open‐bid format is highly sensitive to quality transparency, generating significantly lower buyer surplus levels when the information about bidder quality is public.