IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/popmgt/v32y2023i6p1880-1894.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benefits of sourcing alternative inputs of manufacturers for suppliers

Author

Listed:
  • Yuetao Gao
  • Norman Johnson
  • Bo Shen
  • Yinliang (Ricky) Tan

Abstract

A downstream manufacturer can procure high‐quality inputs from its upstream raw material supplier to produce finished products with high quality. The manufacturer may also have the option to source alternative cheaper low‐quality inputs to partially replace the inputs from its supplier to produce finished products of lower quality. That is, the manufacturer can use a mixture of the supplier's inputs and alternative ones in product design such that product quality depends on the proportion of each input used in products. We endogenize this product quality decision in a simple analytical model to study the impact of this option on the supplier's profits. Intuitively, the option of sourcing alternative inputs could hurt the supplier in two ways: It sells fewer inputs, and it needs to set a lower wholesale price due to competitive pressure. However, our study reveals an opposite finding: The supplier can benefit not only by selling more inputs but also by setting a higher wholesale price when the manufacturer has the option of sourcing alternative low‐quality inputs. This interesting finding is due to the wholesale price push‐up effect: The upstream supplier may deliberately raise the wholesale price when sourcing alternative inputs is an option for the downstream manufacturer. This increased wholesale price encourages the manufacturer to use a higher proportion of alternative cheaper inputs in its product design; as a result, the manufacturer's marginal cost is reduced, which leads to a decrease in its retail price. Therefore, consumer demand for the manufacturer's products becomes higher, which in turn results in higher manufacturer demand for the supplier's inputs. Moreover, we show that despite this higher wholesale price, the manufacturer can earn higher profits by optimally charging a lower retail price. Furthermore, we find that the wholesale price of the supplier's inputs can exceed the manufacturer's retail price, thereby leading to a negative profit margin for the manufacturer from using the supplier's inputs. Finally, we demonstrate the robustness of our findings under several model extensions.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuetao Gao & Norman Johnson & Bo Shen & Yinliang (Ricky) Tan, 2023. "Benefits of sourcing alternative inputs of manufacturers for suppliers," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(6), pages 1880-1894, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:popmgt:v:32:y:2023:i:6:p:1880-1894
    DOI: 10.1111/poms.13946
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13946
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/poms.13946?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giacomo Calzolari & Vincenzo Denicolò, 2015. "Exclusive Contracts and Market Dominance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(11), pages 3321-3351, November.
    2. Qiaohai (Joice) Hu & Panos Kouvelis & Guang Xiao & Xiaomeng Guo, 2022. "Horizontal outsourcing and price competition: The role of sole sourcing commitment," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(8), pages 3198-3216, August.
    3. David Besanko & Shabtai Donnenfeld & Lawrence J. White, 1987. "Monopoly and Quality Distortion: Effects and Remedies," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(4), pages 743-767.
    4. M. Eric Johnson, 2007. "Dual Sourcing Strategies," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Hau L. Lee & Chung-Yee Lee (ed.), Building Supply Chain Excellence in Emerging Economies, chapter 0, pages 113-133, Springer.
    5. Jianqing Chen & Zhiling Guo, 2014. "Strategic Sourcing in the Presence of Uncertain Supply and Retail Competition," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 23(10), pages 1748-1760, October.
    6. Yi Zhu & Anthony Dukes, 2017. "Prominent Attributes Under Limited Attention," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(5), pages 683-698, September.
    7. Giacomo Calzolari & Vincenzo Denicol?, 2013. "Competition with Exclusive Contracts and Market-Share Discounts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2384-2411, October.
    8. Liang Guo & Juanjuan Zhang, 2012. "Consumer Deliberation and Product Line Design," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 995-1007, November.
    9. Aghion, Philippe & Bolton, Patrick, 1987. "Contracts as a Barrier to Entry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 388-401, June.
    10. Juanjuan Zhang, 2011. "The Perils of Behavior-Based Personalization," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 170-186, 01-02.
    11. Jeanine Miklós-Thal & Greg Shaffer, 2016. "Naked Exclusion with Private Offers," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 174-194, November.
    12. Preyas S. Desai, 2001. "Quality Segmentation in Spatial Markets: When Does Cannibalization Affect Product Line Design?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 265-283, August.
    13. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1998. "Upgrades, Tradeins, and Buybacks," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 235-258, Summer.
    14. R. Venkatesh & Wagner Kamakura, 2003. "Optimal Bundling and Pricing under a Monopoly: Contrasting Complements and Substitutes from Independently Valued Products," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76(2), pages 211-232, April.
    15. Krista J. Li & Yan Liu, 2019. "Same or Different? An Aesthetic Design Question," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 28(6), pages 1465-1485, June.
    16. Gerard J. Tellis & Birger Wernerfelt, 1987. "Competitive Price and Quality Under Asymmetric Information," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 240-253.
    17. Sanjay Jain & Krista J. Li, 2018. "Pricing and Product Design for Vice Goods: A Strategic Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(4), pages 592-610, August.
    18. Goering, Patricia A, 1985. "Effects of Product Trial on Consumer Expectations, Demand, and Prices," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 12(1), pages 74-82, June.
    19. John Hauser & Gerard J. Tellis & Abbie Griffin, 2006. "Research on Innovation: A Review and Agenda for," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 687-717, 11-12.
    20. Baozhuang Niu & Jiawei Li & Jie Zhang & Hsing Kenneth Cheng & Yinliang (Ricky) Tan, 2019. "Strategic Analysis of Dual Sourcing and Dual Channel with an Unreliable Alternative Supplier," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 28(3), pages 570-587, March.
    21. Anil Arya & Brian Mittendorf & David E. M. Sappington, 2007. "The Bright Side of Supplier Encroachment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 651-659, 09-10.
    22. Hemant K. Bhargava, 2012. "Retailer-Driven Product Bundling in a Distribution Channel," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 1014-1021, November.
    23. Sammi Yu Tang & Panos Kouvelis, 2011. "Supplier Diversification Strategies in the Presence of Yield Uncertainty and Buyer Competition," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 439-451, October.
    24. William James Adams & Janet L. Yellen, 1976. "Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 90(3), pages 475-498.
    25. Dominique Olié Lauga & Elie Ofek, 2009. "Market Research and Innovation Strategy in a Duopoly," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 373-396, 03-04.
    26. Ganesh Iyer & David A. Soberman, 2016. "Social Responsibility and Product Innovation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(5), pages 727-742, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hiroshi Kitamura & Noriaki Matsushima & Misato Sato, 2023. "Which is better for durable goods producers, exclusive or open supply chain?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 158-176, January.
    2. Martimort, David & Stole, Lars A., 2022. "Participation constraints in discontinuous adverse selection models," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 17(3), July.
    3. Cao, Qingning & Geng, Xianjun & Zhang, Jun, 2015. "Strategic Role of Retailer Bundling in a Distribution Channel," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 50-67.
    4. Philippe Choné & Laurent Linnemer, 2016. "Nonlinear pricing and exclusion:II. Must-stock products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(3), pages 631-660, August.
    5. Armstrong, Mark, 2013. "A more general theory of commodity bundling," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 448-472.
    6. Martimort, David & Pouyet, Jérôme & Trégouët, Thomas, 2021. "Contracts as a barrier to entry: Impact of Buyer’s asymmetric information and bargaining power," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    7. Hiroshi Kitamura & Noriaki Matsushima & Misato Sato, 2018. "Naked exclusion under exclusive-offer competition," ISER Discussion Paper 1021, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    8. Liu Weihua & Yu Hui, 2017. "Pure Components VS Full Mixed Bundling When Stackelberg Pricing," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 5(5), pages 435-445, October.
    9. Kitamura, Hiroshi & Matsushima, Noriaki & Sato, Misato, 2018. "Exclusive contracts with complementary inputs," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 145-167.
    10. Preyas S. Desai & Devavrat Purohit & Bo Zhou, 2018. "Allowing Consumers to Bundle Themselves: The Profitability of Family Plans," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(6), pages 953-969, November.
    11. Terrence August & Duy Dao & Kihoon Kim, 2019. "Market Segmentation and Software Security: Pricing Patching Rights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(10), pages 4575-4597, October.
    12. Kamel Jedidi & Sharan Jagpal & Puneet Manchanda, 2003. "Measuring Heterogeneous Reservation Prices for Product Bundles," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 107-130, July.
    13. Ashutosh Prasad & R. Venkatesh & Vijay Mahajan, 2017. "Temporal product bundling with myopic and strategic consumers: Manifestations and relative effectiveness," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 341-368, December.
    14. Meyer, Jeffrey & Shankar, Venkatesh, 2016. "Pricing Strategies for Hybrid Bundles: Analytical Model and Insights," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(2), pages 133-146.
    15. Girju, Marina & Prasad, Ashutosh & Ratchford, Brian T., 2013. "Pure Components versus Pure Bundling in a Marketing Channel," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 89(4), pages 423-437.
    16. Vithala R. Rao & Gary J. Russell & Hemant Bhargava & Alan Cooke & Tim Derdenger & Hwang Kim & Nanda Kumar & Irwin Levin & Yu Ma & Nitin Mehta & John Pracejus & R. Venkatesh, 2018. "Emerging Trends in Product Bundling: Investigating Consumer Choice and Firm Behavior," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 107-120, March.
    17. Armstrong, Mark, 2010. "Bundling revisited: substitute products and inter-firm discounts," MPRA Paper 26782, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Hemant K. Bhargava, 2013. "Mixed Bundling of Two Independently Valued Goods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(9), pages 2170-2185, September.
    19. Dong, Binwei & Tang, Wansheng & Zhou, Chi & Ren, Yufei, 2021. "Should original equipment manufacturer assist noncompetitive contract manufacturer to expand capacity?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    20. Tang, Yuanzhao & Perera, Sandun C. & Cao, Qingning & Ji, Xiang, 2023. "Supplier versus platform bundling: Optimal strategies under agency selling," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:popmgt:v:32:y:2023:i:6:p:1880-1894. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1937-5956 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.