Coordinating Production and Marketing with Dynamic Transfer Prices

Decentralized decision making is a fact in the modern business world accompanied by extensive research that looks into its consequences for overall firm profits. We study the interactions of decentralized marketing and operations divisions in a corporation and explore their impact on overall firm profits in the case with and without coordination of the two decentralized units. We assume that the marketing department is responsible for the price that influences the demand (sales), and the operations department is responsible for the production rate. We allow for backlogging over time. We model the interdependence involving marketing and operations decisions as a non‐cooperative differential game, with the two divisions as strategically interacting players. We find that, without coordination, strategic interactions of marketing and production result in inefficiencies that can quantitatively be substantial. Next, we introduce a dynamic transfer pricing scheme as a coordination device and evaluate if it establishes efficient (first best and fully coordinated) outcomes. We show that if production and marketing play a game with pre‐commitment strategies, there exists a dynamic transfer price that efficiently (fully) coordinates decentralized decision making and hence results in Pareto‐efficient company profits. If the two decentralized divisions play a game without pre‐commitment, dynamic transfer prices can partially coordinate decentralized decision making but fail to fully eliminate overall inefficiencies arising from strategic interactions among decentralized divisions.     

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.     

考虑消费者策略行为的供应链两周期定价与契约设计

针对由一个制造商与一个零售商构成的供应链,考虑消费者的策略性跨期购买行为,构建了两周期动态博弈模型,分析了消费者策略性程度对两周期均衡结果、消费者剩余和社会福利的影响,比较了分散式与集中式决策的均衡偏差,设计了与消费者策略性程度相关的两周期收益共享契约与"两周期收益共享+转移支付"组合式契约。研究表明：分散式决策下,消费者策略性程度有利于增加消费者剩余和社会福利,但会对供应链成员不利;某些情形下,消费者策略性程度会使分散式与集中式决策的系统利润差值增大;当消费者策略性程度相对较低时,两周期收益共享契约不仅可实现供应链完美协调,还可增加消费者剩余和社会福利;当消费者策略性程度较高时,通过组合式契约可实现供应链完美协调,但此时消费者策略性程度的增强可能对消费者剩余和社会福利产生负面影响。     

委托授权下企业横向兼并效应与激励机制研究

针对异质产品Cournot寡头竞争市场,研究两种不同委托授权下企业的横向兼并效应与内部激励机制调整问题.首先证明了无论企业采用何种类型委托授权模式都具有较大的横向兼并动机,且产品替代性程度越低,兼并动力越大,只是在分散委托授权模式下企业的兼并动机比集中委托授权模式稍弱一些.并且证明兼并企业采用分散委托授权模式时与采用集中委托授权模式时其经营者激励机制调整有明显不同,集中委托授权模式所采用的经营者激励机制其攻击性普遍增强,而分散委托授权模式所采用的经营者激励机制其攻击性普遍减弱,但未兼并企业所采用的经营者激励机制其攻击性总是随兼并规模的增大而增加.     

基于社会福利的专利研发投资策略评价

专利技术的研发投资策略不仅影响企业价值还会影响消费者剩余,两种影响通常会呈现出两种不同的效应,从而导致专利研发投资决策对社会福利的不同影响.针对旨在通过研发专利技术从而垄断新兴市场的两非对称企业,结合投资时机选择期权博弈模型和消费者剩余模型得到非合作博弈(即专利竞赛)和合作博弈两种模式下的总投资净现值和消费者剩余,分析社会福利与影响其变化的诸多因素间的动态变化特征并提出相应的创新政策建议.结果表明,若以社会福利最大化为目标,则两企业的研发能力差异越小、专利技术的成长性越好、无风险利率越小、专利产品质量越低时,社会计划者的政策越应有利于合作研发模式;反之,政策越应鼓励竞争.而专利研发投资成本及初始价值会对两种模式下的社会福利差异的影响表现出"非线性"特征,政策的倾向性不确定.     

Impact of Retailers with Knowledge of Supplier's Inventory on Supply Chain Performance

We model a supply chain consisting of a supplier and multiple retailers facing deterministic demand. We denote some retailers as strategic in the sense that given the supplier inventory information, they will implement the optimal stocking policy by incorporating such information. On the other hand, some retailers are denoted as naïve in the sense that they ignore supply information and resort to a simplistic ordering policy. Naïve retailers learn the optimal policy over time and adjust their orders accordingly. We study the dynamics of this game and investigate the impact of such strategic and naïve retailers on the cost, ordering pattern and stocking policies of all parties. We analyze the supply chain under two scenarios: the centralized supply chain where the objective is to minimize the total supply chain cost, and the decentralized supply chain where each self‐interested player minimizes its own cost in a Stackelberg game setting. We fully characterize the optimal policies under both centralized and decentralized scenarios and show that, surprisingly, the supply chain might be better off by virtue of naïve retailers. The result is driven by the fact that strategic and naïve players’ decisions shift the positioning of inventory in the supply chain with its final impact being determined by the relative costs of different retailer‐types. Our results also offer managerial insights into how access to supply information can improve supply chain performance.     

政府规制下混合渠道销售/回收的电器电子产品闭环供应链决策

针对混合渠道销售及回收的电器电子产品闭环供应链(CLSC),考虑当前我国实施的WEEE规制政策的影响,建立CLSC决策模型,并基于博弈分析方法求得政府规制工具的最优参数和CLSC中各成员企业的最优经营策略及利润,以及社会福利和消费者剩余。结果表明:政府向电器电子产品制造商征收的WEEE处理基金越高,则产品批发价、直销价和分销价均越高;政府给予WEEE处理商的处理补贴越高,则各WEEE回收企业的回收价格及回收量均越高;消费者环保意识越高以及对WEEE回收价越敏感,都越有助于各回收企业增加WEEE回收量,提高CLSC各成员企业的利润,以及促进社会福利和消费者剩余的增加;消费者对产品分销价与直销价的价格差越敏感,则对制造商和销售商的利润、社会福利以及消费者剩余越无益,但不影响第三方回收企业和处理企业的利润。     

Energy Performance Contracting in a Competitive Environment*

Energy Performance Contracting (EPC) is an important and effective energy conservation mechanism, under which an energy service company (ESCO) provides an energy‐saving service to its client and shares the resulting energy cost savings. Using a game‐theoretic model, we investigate the impacts of EPC on two competing manufacturers, of which one is more energy‐efficient in production than the other. The less energy‐efficient firm first proposes an energy‐saving sharing contract to the more energy‐efficient firm, who, if accepting the contract, acts as an ESCO that decides the energy‐saving target and helps realize it for the client. Then the firms engage in Cournot competition by producing/selling substitutable products. By solving the equilibrium solutions, we show that under an EPC project, the total production quantity of both firms increases (so the market price of the product decreases) with the ESCO producing less while its client producing more, which also leads to a higher consumer surplus. Meanwhile, both manufactures are better off under EPC and would obtain strictly higher profits when the service cost rate is high. Nevertheless, EPC may not result in a better environmental performance in that the total energy consumption of both firms may be higher under EPC, which happens when the market size is small and the ESCO has not much energy‐efficiency advantage over its client. We also study four extensions: When the energy saving service and production decisions are made separately, we find the more energy‐efficient firm is worse off when implementing EPC; when the energy‐saving sharing ratio is determined by the ESCO instead of the client, the ESCO extracts all the surplus derived from the EPC project while the total energy consumption of both firms is always reduced; when the energy‐saving sharing ratio is determined via Nash bargaining, the main insights from the base model remain valid; finally, when the client sets the target of overall cost reduction, it extracts all the surplus derived from the EPC project.     

Delegation vs. Control in Supply Chain Procurement under Competition

This paper studies the optimal component procurement strategies of two competing OEMs selling substitutable products. The OEMs outsource their production to a common contract manufacturer, who in turn needs an input from a component supplier. Each OEM may either directly procure the input from the component supplier, or delegate the procurement task to the contract manufacturer. We first analyze the OEMs' procurement game under a non‐strategic supplier whose component price is exogenously given. It is found that symmetric equilibria arise for most situations, that is, both OEMs either control or delegate their component procurement in equilibrium. Interestingly, despite the commonly‐held belief that the contract manufacturer would be worse off as OEMs gain component procurement control, we show that the contract manufacturer may enjoy a higher profit. Then we study the OEMs' procurement game under a strategic supplier who can set its component price. We find that the supplier's strategic pricing behavior plays a critical role in the equilibrium procurement structure. In particular, in the equilibrium under strategic supplier, the larger OEM always uses delegation while the smaller OEM may use either delegation or control. By identifying the driving forces behind the OEMs' procurement choices, this research helps explain observed industry practices and offer useful guidelines for firms' component sourcing decisions.     

考虑顾客策略行为和产品质量的闭环供应链决策模型

策略型的顾客对于不同质量的产品以及不同时间的产品会有不同的估值和支付意愿,企业在进行决策时应当考虑顾客的策略性行为。建立了由一个制造商(即原始设备制造商)和一个独立的再制造商以及一组策略型顾客组成的闭环供应链模型,利用动态博弈理论分析了当由独立的再制造商负责回收旧产品并进行再制造时顾客策略行为和再制造品的质量水平对闭环供应链的产品价格、利润、消费者剩余的影响。研究结果表明,当顾客的策略程度增加时,制造商的利润减少,再制造商的利润和消费者剩余增加。当再制造品的质量水平增加时,制造商的利润降低,再制造商的利润先增加后降低,消费者剩余增加。     

闭环供应链再制品消费补贴政策模型分析

本文从政府提供消费补贴以鼓励消费者选择购买再制品的视角,构建了政府消费补贴下的闭环供应链博弈模型,得到了政府的最优消费补贴策略,并探讨了政府消费补贴政策对闭环供应链新品与再制品的定价、供应链总利润、消费者剩余、社会福利的影响。研究结果表明：1）只有满足特定条件时,政府才需提供再制品消费补贴;2）政府的消费补贴在制造商和消费者之间进行平均分配,因而补贴政策对制造商和消费者均有激励作用;3）政府消费补贴政策有利于供应链总利润、消费者剩余、社会福利的提高;4）政府应引导制造商专注于再制造,将废旧品的回收交由第三方回收商来完成,这有利于提高废旧产品的回收率;5）政府消费补贴政策将造成再制品对新品的市场挤兑效应。论文最后利用数值试验对研究结果进行了验证。     

Demand Forecast Sharing in Supply Chains

This paper examines the incentives of a manufacturer and a retailer to share their demand forecasts. The demand at the retailer is a linearly decreasing function of price. The manufacturer sets the wholesale price first, and the retailer sets the retail price after observing the wholesale price. Both players set their prices based on their forecasts of demand. In the make‐to‐order scenario, the manufacturer sets the production quantity after observing the actual demand; in the make‐to‐stock scenario, the manufacturer sets the production quantity before the demand is realized. In the make‐to‐order scenario, we show that sharing the forecast unconditionally by the retailer with the manufacturer benefits the manufacturer but hurts the retailer. We also demonstrate that a side payment contract cannot induce Pareto‐optimal information sharing equilibrium, but a discount based wholesale price contract can. The social welfare as well as consumer surplus is higher under the discount contract, compared with under no information sharing. In the make‐to‐stock scenario, the manufacturer realizes additional benefits in the form of savings in inventory holding and shortage costs when forecasts are shared. If the savings from inventory holding and shortage costs because of information sharing are sufficiently high, then a side payment contract that induces Pareto‐optimal information sharing is feasible in the make‐to‐stock scenario. We also provide additional managerial insights with the help of a computational study.     

政府补贴下制造/再制造竞争机理研究

以政府“以旧换再”补贴政策为背景,建立了原始制造商、再制造商与零售商两阶段博弈模型.基于此博弈模型,考虑政府不采取补贴政策、政府补贴给再制造商及政府通过零售商补贴购买再制造产品消费者3种情况,对比分析了政府不同补贴策略对两种产品单位批发价格、零售价格、销售量、利润、消费者剩余及环境的影响.结果表明:当再制造产品的需求不受废旧产品回收量限制,政府补贴可以降低两种产品单位零售价格,增加再制造商和零售商的利润,提高消费者的剩余;当再制造产品的需求受到废旧产品回收量限制时,政府补贴可以增加两种产品的单位批发价格和两种产品制造商的利润,但是会降低零售商的销售利润.     

考虑跨渠道退货的双渠道闭环供应链决策研究

双渠道闭环供应链存在制造商网络直销渠道和零售商实体店零售渠道。消费者会对购买不满意的产品进行退货，由于网上商店购买的产品缺乏现场体验故退货率较高。相比线下实体商店，线上退货流程更为复杂，这往往容易影响消费者购物体验。因此本文设计考虑跨渠道退货的双渠道闭环供应链结构，并分析跨渠道退货率以及渠道消费偏好对供应链的决策影响，基于Stackelberg博弈和Nash均衡博弈理论，从集中式决策与分散式决策两方面研究不同闭环供应链结构下的定价决策与利润分配，并结合数值算例进行分析。研究结果表明，跨渠道退货率以及消费者渠道偏好对闭环供应链的定价策略以及利润分配等决策具有显著影响。     

Improving Valuation Under Consumer Search: Implications for Pricing and Profits

There is a growing trend in the retail industry to improve customer experience. In this article, we study retailer‐initiated strategies to increase consumer valuation for a product under duopoly. In such a setting, it is possible that a consumer's valuation may be increased by one retailer; however, the consumer may decide to buy the product from the competitor. We consider a two‐stage game where retailers first decide whether to invest in improvements in customer valuation and then engage in price competition. We computationally explore the Nash equilibria in terms of both investment and pricing. We find that in the majority of cases retailers price in a manner to discourage their local customers to buy from the competitor. Next, we focus on the pricing game and theoretically characterize the pricing Nash equilibrium. We find that a retailer could overcome competitive effects by improving consumer valuation beyond a certain threshold. We also find that a retailer who does not invest could benefit from competition in situations where his competitor increases consumer valuation beyond a threshold. Finally, we explore through a computational study the Nash equilibria of the two‐stage game using an alternate model to establish the robustness of our findings.     

P2P Marketplaces and Retailing in the Presence of Consumers' Valuation Uncertainty

Can peer‐to‐peer (P2P) marketplaces benefit traditional supply chains when consumers may experience valuation risk? P2P marketplaces can mitigate consumers' risk by allowing them to trade mismatched goods; yet, they also impose a threat to retailers and their suppliers as they compete over consumers. Further, do profit‐maximizing marketplaces always extract the entire consumer surplus from the online trades? Our two‐period model highlights the effects introduced by P2P marketplaces while accounting for the platform's pricing decisions. We prove that with low product unit cost, the P2P marketplace sets its transaction fee to the market clearing price, thereby extracting all of the seller surplus. In this range of product unit cost, the supply chain partners are worse off due to the emergence of a P2P marketplace. However, when the unit cost is high, the platform sets its transaction fee to be less than the market clearing price, intentionally leaving money on the table, as a mechanism to stimulate first period demand for new goods in expectation for some of them to be traded later, in the second period, via the marketplace. It is not until the surplus left with the sellers is sufficiently high that the supply chain partners manage to extract some of this surplus, ultimately making them better off due to a P2P marketplace. We further analyze the impact of a P2P marketplace on consumer surplus and social welfare. In addition, we consider model variants accounting for a frictionless platform and consumer strategic waiting.     

售电侧改革、市场主体变化与电价红利:基于讨价还价博弈

本文通过构建“一对多”和“多对多”讨价还价博弈模型,研究了售电侧改革前后,发电商和售电公司之间关于消费者剩余分配的博弈过程。具体来说,文章从售电侧改革带来的博弈主体与博弈机制变化角度,揭示了售电侧改革对用户电价红利的影响。研究发现:售电侧放开后,电力市场交易机制由“一对多”竞价上网变为“多对多”讨价还价匹配,造成了售电侧博弈主体的议价能力下降,发电侧博弈主体相对议价能力上升。发电商群体将索取更多的消费者剩余,从而推动发电侧整体报价的上涨,挤压了售电侧的利润空间,导致售电公司被迫抬高市场电价,最终剥夺了用户的电价红利。研究揭示了售电侧改革未能带来电价下降的根本原因。     

Net Neutrality,Broadband Market Coverage,and Innovation at the Edge*

Net neutrality (NN) is a widely debated policy issue that has the potential to alter the dynamics of accessing online content. The focal point of the debate lies in whether broadband service providers (BSPs) should be allowed to charge content providers for the preferential delivery of their digital content. This decision will affect broadband market coverage for end consumers as well as the issues of long‐term competition and innovation in the market of digital content. Our research aims to analyze and address these issues. We propose a game theoretical model with three players—the BSP, the content providers, and the consumers—where the BSP, in its capacity as a gatekeeper between the content providers and the consumers, is modeled as a two‐sided market platform. We find that while abandoning the principle of NN might sometimes result in increased consumer surplus and broadband market coverage, it can also hinder the ability of startups to compete against established rivals and thus reduce innovation at the edge. The results should be of great interest to policymakers as they debate on this very crucial issue.     

Delegation and Wage Determination in Trade Unions

Delegation of wage determination is modelled as the transferral of decision‐making rights to better‐informed agents. The rank and file of trade unions has less information and can, therefore, benefit from delegation. However, delegation might be disadvantageous for union members, since delegates pursue their own objectives. Also, delegates might incur a utility reduction, since becoming a delegate implies forfeiting a better‐paid outside option. We investigate under what conditions delegation of wage bargaining power is beneficial for union members and their potential leaders. The wage and employment effects of delegation are derived.     

Supply Chain Contracting Under Competition: Bilateral Bargaining vs. Stackelberg

We analyze contracting behaviors in a two‐tier supply chain system consisting of competing manufacturers and competing retailers. We contrast the contracting outcome of a Stackelberg game, in which the manufacturers offer take‐it‐or‐leave‐it contracts to the retailers, with that of a bargaining game, in which the firms bilaterally negotiate contract terms via a process of alternating offers. The manufacturers in the Stackelberg game possess a Stackelberg‐leader advantage in that the retailers are not entitled to make counteroffers. Our analysis suggests that whether this advantage would benefit the manufacturers depends on the contractual form. With simple contracts such as wholesale‐price contracts, which generally do not allow one party to fully extract the trade surplus, the Stackelberg game replicates the boundary case of the bargaining game with the manufacturers possessing all the bargaining power. In contrast, with sophisticated contracts such as two‐part tariffs, which enable full surplus extraction, the two games lead to distinct outcomes. We further show that the game structure being Stackelberg or bargaining critically affects firms' preferences over contract types and thus their equilibrium contract choices. These observations suggest that the Stackelberg game may not be a sufficient device to predict contracting behaviors in reality where bargaining is commonly observed.