This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Using Auctions To Reward Tournament Winners: Theory and Experimental Investigations

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Richard L. Fullerton
Bruce G. Linster
Michael McKee
Stephen Slate

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

This article explores theoretical and experimental implications of using auctions to reward winners of research tournaments. This process is a hybrid of the research tournament for a prize and a first-price auction held after the research is complete. The bids in the auction consist of a vector of both quality of the innovation and price. The experimental evidence supports the hypothesis that conducting auctions at the end of research tournaments will generally reduce the sponsor's prize expenditure relative to fixed-prize research tournaments. The potential importance of these results to the U.S. Department of Defense acquisition process is emphasized.

Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Publisher Info
Article provided by The RAND Corporation in its journal RAND Journal of Economics.

Volume (Year): 33 (2002)
Issue (Month): 1 (Spring)
Pages: 62-84
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:rje:randje:v:33:y:2002:i:spring:p:62-84

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.rje.org

Order Information:
Web: http://gemini.econ.umd.edu/cgi-bin/rje_online.cgi

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: ().

Related research
Keywords:

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Anja Schöttner, 2008. "Fixed-prize tournaments versus first-price auctions in innovation contests," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 57-71, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  2. James T. Swarthout & Jason Shachat, 2004. "Procurement Auctions for Differentiated Goods," Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 629, Econometric Society. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. Derek Clark & Christian Riis, 2007. "Contingent payments in selection contests," Review of Economic Design, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 125-137, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Alexander Matros, 2006. "Elimination Tournaments where Players Have Fixed Resources," Working Papers 205, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Economics, revised Jan 2006. [Downloadable!]
  5. Cabral, Luís M B & Cozzi, Guido & Denicolo, Vincenzo & Spagnolo, Giancarlo & Zanza, Matteo, 2006. "Procuring Innovation," CEPR Discussion Papers 5774, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. J. Todd Swarthout & Jason Shachat, 2004. "The performance of reverse auctions versus request for quotes when procuring goods with quality differences," Econometric Society 2004 North American Winter Meetings 255, Econometric Society. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? It is the publishers that input data about their publications, as there is no staff at RePEc.

This page was last updated on 2008-12-28.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.