IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v55y2009i5p763-780.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiple Sourcing and Procurement Process Selection with Bidding Events

Author

Listed:
  • Tunay I. Tunca

    () (Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305)

  • Qiong Wu

    () (Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305; and BNP Paribas, Hong Kong, China)

Abstract

We examine the procurement process selection problem of a large industrial buyer who employs reverse auctions for awarding procurement contracts. We contrast two classes of commonly used strategies under multiple sourcing; namely, single-stage reverse auctions, and two-stage processes where price-quantity adjustments between the buyer and the suppliers follow a first-stage reverse auction. Deriving bounds of efficiency for these two classes of procurement processes under convex supplier production costs, we present insights on the conditions under which each class is preferable for the buyer. Considering the effect of contracting and processing costs, a single-stage process is likely to be preferable to a two-stage process when the number of bidding suppliers is high, especially when capacity is rigid. A two-stage process with one information transfer in the second stage may be the preferred procurement mode when production is highly scalable, i.e., when the marginal production cost increase with increased production is small. When the number of suppliers is low, the effect of a decrease in production scalability depends on the current scalability level. For high scalability levels, a decrease in production scalability may decrease the efficiency of both single-stage and simple two-stage processes, whereas for low scalability levels, it tends to increase efficiency for both of these process classes. A decrease in production costs makes employing simple processes more attractive when production is highly scalable or when supplier capacity is rigid. For intermediate production scalability, however, a cost decrease may make employing two-stage processes with multiple information transfers in the second round preferable for the buyer.

Suggested Citation

  • Tunay I. Tunca & Qiong Wu, 2009. "Multiple Sourcing and Procurement Process Selection with Bidding Events," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(5), pages 763-780, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:55:y:2009:i:5:p:763-780
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1080.0972
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Myerson, Roger B, 1983. "Mechanism Design by an Informed Principal," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(6), pages 1767-1797, November.
    2. Mark Bagnoli & Ted Bergstrom, 2005. "Log-concave probability and its applications," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(2), pages 445-469, August.
    3. Richard Engelbrecht-Wiggans & Charles M. Kahn, 1998. "Multi-unit auctions with uniform prices," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 12(2), pages 227-258.
    4. Paul R. Kleindorfer & D. J. Wu, 2003. "Integrating Long- and Short-Term Contracting via Business-to-Business Exchanges for Capital-Intensive Industries," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(11), pages 1597-1615, November.
    5. Martin K. Perry & JÛzsef S·kovics, 2003. "Auctions for Split-Award Contracts," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 215-242, June.
    6. Klemperer, Paul, 1999. " Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-286, July.
    7. James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 1992. "Coordination in Split Award Auctions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 107(2), pages 681-707.
    8. Willis R. Greer, Jr. & Shu S. Liao, 1986. "An Analysis of Risk and Return in the Defense Market: Its Impact on Weapon System Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(10), pages 1259-1273, October.
    9. Teich, Jeffrey E. & Wallenius, Hannele & Wallenius, Jyrki & Koppius, Otto R., 2004. "Emerging multiple issue e-auctions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(1), pages 1-16, November.
    10. Sudhindra Seshadri & Kalyan Chatterjee & Gary L. Lilien, 1991. "Multiple Source Procurement Competitions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 246-263.
    11. McGuire, Thomas G. & Riordan, Michael H., 1995. "Incomplete information and optimal market structure public purchases from private providers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 125-141, January.
    12. Gérard P. Cachon & Fuqiang Zhang, 2006. "Procuring Fast Delivery: Sole Sourcing with Information Asymmetry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 881-896, June.
    13. Klemperer, Paul, 1999. " Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-86, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gong, Jiong & Li, Jianpei & McAfee, R. Preston, 2012. "Split-award contracts with investment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 188-197.
    2. Jose Alcalde & Matthias Dahm, 2016. "Proportional payoffs in legislative bargaining with weighted voting: a characterization," Discussion Papers 2016-03, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    3. Yim, Andrew, 2010. "Quality Cost and Failure Risk in the Choice of Single versus Multiple Sourcing," MPRA Paper 27858, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Liu, Shuren & Liu, Changgeng & Hu, Qiying, 2013. "Optimal procurement strategies by reverse auctions with stochastic demand," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 430-435.
    5. Jason Shachat & Lijia Tan, 2015. "An Experimental Investigation of Auctions and Bargaining in Procurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1036-1051, May.
    6. Anton, James J. & Brusco, Sandro & Lopomo, Giuseppe, 2010. "Split-award procurement auctions with uncertain scale economies: Theory and data," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 24-41, May.
    7. Jain, Vipul & Panchal, Gajanan B. & Kumar, Sameer, 2014. "Universal supplier selection via multi-dimensional auction mechanisms for two-way competition in oligopoly market of supply chain," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 127-137.
    8. Alok Gupta & Stephen Parente & Pallab Sanyal, 2012. "Competitive bidding for health insurance contracts: lessons from the online HMO auctions," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 303-322, December.
    9. Fuqiang Zhang, 2010. "Procurement Mechanism Design in a Two-Echelon Inventory System with Price-Sensitive Demand," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 608-626, August.
    10. Romero Morales, Dolores & Steinberg, Richard, 2014. "Revenue deficiency under second-price auctions in a supply-chain setting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(1), pages 131-144.
    11. Budde, Maximilian & Minner, Stefan, 2014. "First- and second-price sealed-bid auctions applied to push and pull supply contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(1), pages 370-382.
    12. Lorentziadis, Panos L., 2016. "Optimal bidding in auctions from a game theory perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(2), pages 347-371.
    13. Fu, Ke & Xu, Jiayan & Miao, Zhaowei, 2013. "Newsvendor with multiple options of expediting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 226(1), pages 94-99.
    14. Alcalde, Jose & Dahm, Mathias, 2016. "Dual Sourcing with Price Discovery," QM&ET Working Papers 16-1, University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory.
    15. Mahadevan, B. & Hazra, Jishnu & Jain, Tarun, 2017. "Services outsourcing under asymmetric cost information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(2), pages 456-467.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:55:y:2009:i:5:p:763-780. 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: (Mirko Janc). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.