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
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1080.0972
    as

    Download full text from publisher

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

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1080.0972?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. 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, 2006. "Log-concave probability and its applications," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Charalambos D. Aliprantis & Rosa L. Matzkin & Daniel L. McFadden & James C. Moore & Nicholas C. Yann (ed.), Rationality and Equilibrium, pages 217-241, Springer.
    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 & József Sákovics, 2003. "Auctions for Split‐Award Contracts," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 215-242, June.
    6. Paul Klemperer, 1999. "Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-286, July.
    7. Dirk Bergemann & Stephen Morris, 2012. "Robust Mechanism Design," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robust Mechanism Design The Role of Private Information and Higher Order Beliefs, chapter 2, pages 49-96, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Fangruo Chen, 2007. "Auctioning Supply Contracts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1562-1576, October.
    9. 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)

    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. Wedad J. Elmaghraby, 2000. "Supply Contract Competition and Sourcing Policies," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 2(4), pages 350-371, April.
    2. Fangruo Chen, 2007. "Auctioning Supply Contracts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1562-1576, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Dimitris Kostamis & Damian R. Beil & Izak Duenyas, 2009. "Total-Cost Procurement Auctions: Impact of Suppliers' Cost Adjustments on Auction Format Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1985-1999, December.
    5. Pamela Pen-Erh Pei & David Simchi-Levi & Tunay I. Tunca, 2011. "Sourcing Flexibility, Spot Trading, and Procurement Contract Structure," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(3), pages 578-601, June.
    6. Gustavo Vulcano & Garrett van Ryzin & Costis Maglaras, 2002. "Optimal Dynamic Auctions for Revenue Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(11), pages 1388-1407, November.
    7. Hazra, Jishnu & Mahadevan, B., 2009. "A procurement model using capacity reservation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 193(1), pages 303-316, February.
    8. 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.
    9. Armstrong, Mark & Sappington, David E.M., 2007. "Recent Developments in the Theory of Regulation," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 27, pages 1557-1700, Elsevier.
    10. Aadhaar Chaturvedi & Damian R. Beil & Victor Martínez-de-Albéniz, 2014. "Split-Award Auctions for Supplier Retention," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(7), pages 1719-1737, July.
    11. Peter Bogetoft & Kurt Nielsen, 2002. "DEA Based Yardstick Competition in Natural Resource Management," CIE Discussion Papers 2002-04, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics.
    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. Emiel Maasland & Sander Onderstal, 2006. "Going, Going, Gone! A Swift Tour of Auction Theory and its Applications," De Economist, Springer, vol. 154(2), pages 197-249, June.
    14. Pitchik, Carolyn, 2009. "Budget-constrained sequential auctions with incomplete information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 928-949, July.
    15. Philippe Jehiel & Benny Moldovanu, 2005. "Allocative and Informational Externalities in Auctions and Related Mechanisms," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000490, UCLA Department of Economics.
    16. Cuihong Li & Laurens G. Debo, 2009. "Second Sourcing vs. Sole Sourcing with Capacity Investment and Asymmetric Information," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 448-470, July.
    17. Hannu Vartiainen, 2003. "Auction Design without Commitment," Working Papers 2003.24, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. Holst, Gesa Sophie & Musshoff, Oliver & Vollmer, Elisabeth, 2018. "How does the Risk Attitude affect the Bidding Behavior of Farmers? Results of an Experimental Auction," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 67(1), March.
    19. Longstaff, Francis A & Han, Bing & Merrill, Craig, 2004. "Revenue Implications of Multi-Item Multi-Unit Auction Designs: Empirical Evidence from the U.S. Treasury Buyback Auctions," University of California at Los Angeles, Anderson Graduate School of Management qt7344v866, Anderson Graduate School of Management, UCLA.
    20. Tunay I. Tunca & Stefanos A. Zenios, 2006. "Supply Auctions and Relational Contracts for Procurement," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 43-67, February.

    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.

    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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.