Might randomization in queue discipline be useful when waiting cost is a concave function of waiting time?
This paper suggests that introducing randomization in queue discipline might be welfare enhancing in certain queues for which the cost of waiting is a concave function of waiting time. Concavity can make increased variability in waiting times good not bad for aggregate customer welfare. Such concavity may occur if the costs of waiting asymptotically approach some maximum or if the customer incurs a fixed cost if there is any wait at all. As examples, cost might asymptotically approach a maximum for patients seeking organ transplants who will not live beyond a certain threshold time, and fixed costs could pertain for knowledge workers seeking a piece of information that is required to proceed with their current task, so any delay creates a "set up charge" associated with switching tasks.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Oguzhan Alagoz & Lisa M. Maillart & Andrew J. Schaefer & Mark S. Roberts, 2004. "The Optimal Timing of Living-Donor Liver Transplantation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1420-1430, October.
- Xuanming Su & Stefanos Zenios, 2004. "Patient Choice in Kidney Allocation: The Role of the Queueing Discipline," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 280-301, June.
- Chew, Soo Hong & Ho, Joanna L, 1994. "Hope: An Empirical Study of Attitude toward the Timing of Uncertainty Resolution," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 267-88, May.
- Stefanos A. Zenios, 2002. "Optimal Control of a Paired-Kidney Exchange Program," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(3), pages 328-342, March.
- Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
- Xuanming Su & Stefanos A. Zenios, 2006. "Recipient Choice Can Address the Efficiency-Equity Trade-off in Kidney Transplantation: A Mechanism Design Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1647-1660, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:44:y:2010:i:1:p:19-24. See general 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: (Zhang, Lei)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.