Auctions versus Negotiations in Procurement: An Empirical Analysis
AbstractRevised October 2002 When should a buyer award a procurement contract through competitive bidding, and when would negotiating with the sellers be preferred? To shed some light on this question, we examine a unique data set of non-residential, private sector building contracts awarded in Northern California during the years 1995-2000. Our analysis suggests a number of limitations to the use of auctions, as compared to negotiations, that we believe are new to the literature. First, auctions perform poorly when projects are complex and contractual design is incomplete. Second, the benefits to auctions fall when the number of available bidders decreases. Third, auctions stifle communication between the buyer and the contractor, preventing the buyer from taking advantage of the contractor’s expertise when choosing how to design the project. Finally, auctions fail to protect the privacy of the buyer and involve increased administrative expenses and delay. Working Papers Index
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Stanford University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 02007.
Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Ralph Landau Economics Building, Stanford, CA 94305-6072
Web page: http://www-econ.stanford.edu/econ/workp/
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
- Steven Tadelis, 2009. "Auctions Versus Negotiations in Procurement: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 372-399, October.
- Patrick Bajari & Robert S. McMillan & Steve Tadelis, 2003. "Auctions Versus Negotiations in Procurement: An Empirical Analysis," NBER Working Papers 9757, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- L0 - Industrial Organization - - General
- D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2002-09-28 (All new papers)
- NEP-GTH-2002-09-28 (Game Theory)
- NEP-MIC-2002-10-10 (Microeconomics)
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.:
- Robert H. Porter, 1992.
"The Role of Information in U.S. Offshore Oil and Gas Lease Auctions,"
NBER Working Papers
4185, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Porter, Robert H, 1995. "The Role of Information in U.S. Offshore Oil and Gas Lease Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(1), pages 1-27, January.
- Robert H. Porter, 1992. "The Role of Information in U.S. Offshore Oil and Gas Lease Auctions," Discussion Papers 1008, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Alejandro M. Manelli & Daniel R. Vincent, 1992.
"Optimal Procurement Mechanisms,"
999, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Daniel A. Ackerberg & Maristella Botticini, 2002.
"Endogenous Matching and the Empirical Determinants of Contract Form,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(3), pages 564-591, June.
- Daniel A. Ackerberg & Maristella Botticini, 1999. "Endogenous Matching and the Empirical Determinants of Contract Form," Papers 0096, Boston University - Industry Studies Programme.
- Ackerberg, D.A. & Botticini, M., 1999. "Endogenous Matching and the Empirical Determinants of Contract Form," Papers 96, Boston University - Department of Economics.
- Daniel A. Ackerberg & Maristella Botticini, 1999. "Endogenous Matching and the Empirical Determinants of Contract Form," Boston University - Institute for Economic Development 92, Boston University, Institute for Economic Development.
- Patrick Bajari & Steven Tadelis, 1999.
"Incentives versus Transaction Costs: A Theory of Procurement Contracts,"
99029, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- Bajari, Patrick & Tadelis, Steven, 2001. "Incentives versus Transaction Costs: A Theory of Procurement Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(3), pages 387-407, Autumn.
- McAfee, R Preston & McMillan, John, 1987. "Auctions and Bidding," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 25(2), pages 699-738, June.
- Milgrom, Paul & Shannon, Chris, 1994.
"Monotone Comparative Statics,"
Econometric Society, vol. 62(1), pages 157-80, January.
- Chamberlain, Gary, 1980. "Analysis of Covariance with Qualitative Data," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 225-38, January.
- Patrick Bajari & Lixin Ye, 2001. "Competition Versus Collusion in Procurement Auctions: Identification and Testing," Working Papers 01001, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- William P. Rogerson, 1994. "Economic Incentives and the Defense Procurement Process," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 65-90, Fall.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Thomas Krichel).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.