IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormsom/v23y2021i3p620-636.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Managing Congestion in Matching Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Nick Arnosti

    (Columbia Business School, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027)

  • Ramesh Johari

    (Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305)

  • Yash Kanoria

    (Columbia Business School, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027)

Abstract

Problem definition : Participants in matching markets face search and screening costs when seeking a match. We study how platform design can reduce the effort required to find a suitable partner. Practical/academic relevance : The success of matching platforms requires designs that minimize search effort and facilitate efficient market clearing. Methodology : We study a game-theoretic model in which “applicants” and “employers” pay costs to search and screen. An important feature of our model is that both sides may waste effort: Some applications are never screened, and employers screen applicants who may have already matched. We prove existence and uniqueness of equilibrium and characterize welfare for participants on both sides of the market. Results : We identify that the market operates in one of two regimes: It is either screening - limited or application - limited . In screening-limited markets, employer welfare is low, and some employers choose not to participate. This occurs when application costs are low and there are enough employers that most applicants match, implying that many screened applicants are unavailable. In application-limited markets, applicants face a “tragedy of the commons” and send many applications that are never read. The resulting inefficiency is worst when there is a shortage of employers. We show that simple interventions—such as limiting the number of applications that an individual can send, making it more costly to apply, or setting an appropriate market-wide wage—can significantly improve the welfare of agents on one or both sides of the market. Managerial implications : Our results suggest that platforms cannot focus exclusively on attracting participants and making it easy to contact potential match partners. A good user experience requires that participants not waste effort considering possibilities that are unlikely to be available. The operational interventions we study alleviate congestion by ensuring that potential match partners are likely to be available.

Suggested Citation

  • Nick Arnosti & Ramesh Johari & Yash Kanoria, 2021. "Managing Congestion in Matching Markets," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 620-636, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:23:y:2021:i:3:p:620-636
    DOI: 10.1287/msom.2020.0927
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/msom.2020.0927
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/msom.2020.0927?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. Pissarides, C A, 1984. "Efficient Job Rejection," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 94(376a), pages 97-108, Supplemen.
    2. Ross Anderson & Itai Ashlagi & David Gamarnik & Yash Kanoria, 2017. "Efficient Dynamic Barter Exchange," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(6), pages 1446-1459, December.
    3. Roth, Alvin E & Xing, Xiaolin, 1997. "Turnaround Time and Bottlenecks in Market Clearing: Decentralized Matching in the Market for Clinical Psychologists," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(2), pages 284-329, April.
    4. Peter Coles & Alexey Kushnir & Muriel Niederle, 2013. "Preference Signaling in Matching Markets," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 99-134, May.
    5. Peter Coles & John Cawley & Phillip B. Levine & Muriel Niederle & Alvin E. Roth & John J. Siegfried, 2010. "The Job Market for New Economists: A Market Design Perspective," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(4), pages 187-206, Fall.
    6. Kushnir, Alexey, 2013. "Harmful signaling in matching markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 209-218.
    7. Diamond, Peter A, 1982. "Aggregate Demand Management in Search Equilibrium," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(5), pages 881-894, October.
    8. Galenianos, Manolis & Kircher, Philipp, 2009. "Directed search with multiple job applications," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 445-471, March.
    9. Philipp Kircher, 2009. "Efficiency of Simultaneous Search," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(5), pages 861-913, October.
    10. Santiago R. Balseiro & Omar Besbes & Gabriel Y. Weintraub, 2015. "Repeated Auctions with Budgets in Ad Exchanges: Approximations and Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(4), pages 864-884, April.
    11. Gad Allon & Achal Bassamboo & Eren B. Çil, 2012. "Large-Scale Service Marketplaces: The Role of the Moderating Firm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(10), pages 1854-1872, October.
    12. Soohyung Lee & Muriel Niederle, 2015. "Propose with a rose? Signaling in internet dating markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 731-755, December.
    13. James Albrecht & Pieter A. Gautier & Susan Vroman, 2006. "Equilibrium Directed Search with Multiple Applications," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 73(4), pages 869-891.
    14. Gabriel Y. Weintraub & C. Lanier Benkard & Benjamin Van Roy, 2008. "Markov Perfect Industry Dynamics With Many Firms," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(6), pages 1375-1411, November.
    15. Hanna Halaburda & Mikołaj Jan Piskorski & Pınar Yıldırım, 2018. "Competing by Restricting Choice: The Case of Matching Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3574-3594, August.
    16. Kenneth Burdett & Shouyong Shi & Randall Wright, 2001. "Pricing and Matching with Frictions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(5), pages 1060-1085, October.
    17. John J. Horton, 2019. "Buyer Uncertainty About Seller Capacity: Causes, Consequences, and a Partial Solution," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(8), pages 3518-3540, August.
    18. Manolis Galenianos & Philipp Kircher, 2012. "On The Game‐Theoretic Foundations Of Competitive Search Equilibrium," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(1), pages 1-21, February.
    19. Pissarides, Christopher A, 1984. "Search Intensity, Job Advertising, and Efficiency," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(1), pages 128-143, January.
    20. Peter A. Diamond, 1982. "Wage Determination and Efficiency in Search Equilibrium," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 49(2), pages 217-227.
    21. Moen, Espen R, 1997. "Competitive Search Equilibrium," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(2), pages 385-411, April.
    22. Krishnamurthy Iyer & Ramesh Johari & Mukund Sundararajan, 2014. "Mean Field Equilibria of Dynamic Auctions with Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 2949-2970, December.
    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. Ali Aouad & Daniela Saban, 2023. "Online Assortment Optimization for Two-Sided Matching Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 2069-2087, April.
    2. Hernandez Senosiain, Patricio, 2022. "Why Do Men Keep Swiping Right? Two-Sided Search in Swipe-Based Dating Platforms," Warwick-Monash Economics Student Papers 37, Warwick Monash Economics Student Papers.
    3. Jaehwuen Jung & Hyungsoo Lim & Dongwon Lee & Chul Kim, 2022. "The Secret to Finding a Match: A Field Experiment on Choice Capacity Design in an Online Dating Platform," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1248-1263, December.
    4. Behnaz Bojd & Hema Yoganarasimhan, 2022. "Star-Cursed Lovers: Role of Popularity Information in Online Dating," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(1), pages 73-92, January.
    5. Ni Huang & Gordon Burtch & Yumei He & Yili Hong, 2022. "Managing Congestion in a Matching Market via Demand Information Disclosure," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1196-1220, December.
    6. Peng Shi, 2023. "Optimal Matchmaking Strategy in Two-Sided Marketplaces," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1323-1340, March.

    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. Yash Kanoria & Daniela Saban, 2021. "Facilitating the Search for Partners on Matching Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 5990-6029, October.
    2. Lester, Benjamin & Visschers, Ludo & Wolthoff, Ronald, 2015. "Meeting technologies and optimal trading mechanisms in competitive search markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 1-15.
    3. Manolis Galenianos & Philipp Kircher & Gábor Virág, 2011. "Market Power And Efficiency In A Search Model," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 52(1), pages 85-103, February.
    4. Albrecht, James & Cai, Xiaoming & Gautier, Pieter & Vroman, Susan, 2023. "On the foundations of competitive search equilibrium with and without market makers," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    5. Gautier, Pieter & Holzner, Christian, 2011. "Simultaneous Search and Network Efficiency," CEPR Discussion Papers 8522, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Peng Shi, 2023. "Optimal Matchmaking Strategy in Two-Sided Marketplaces," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1323-1340, March.
    7. Leo Kaas & Philipp Kircher, 2015. "Efficient Firm Dynamics in a Frictional Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(10), pages 3030-3060, October.
    8. Cai, Xiaoming & Gautier, Pieter A. & Wolthoff, Ronald P., 2017. "Search frictions, competing mechanisms and optimal market segmentation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 453-473.
    9. Mangin, Sephorah, 2017. "A theory of production, matching, and distribution," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 376-409.
    10. Ronald Wolthoff & Pieter Gautier & Xiaoming Cai, 2016. "Inclusive versus Exclusive Markets:," 2016 Meeting Papers 262, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    11. William B. Hawkins, 2013. "Competitive Search, Efficiency, And Multiworker Firms," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 54(1), pages 219-251, February.
    12. Gautier, Pieter A. & Wolthoff, Ronald P., 2009. "Simultaneous search with heterogeneous firms and ex post competition," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 311-319, June.
    13. Derek Stacey, 2019. "Posted Prices, Search and Bargaining," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 33, pages 85-104, July.
    14. Auster, Sarah & Gottardi, Piero, 2019. "Competing mechanisms in markets for lemons," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(3), July.
    15. Matteo Richiardi, 2006. "Toward a Non-Equilibrium Unemployment Theory," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 28(4), pages 421-446, November.
    16. Suren Basov & John Ian King & Lawrence Uren, 2010. "The Employed, the Unemployed, and the Unemployable: Directed Search with Worker Heterogeneity," Working Papers 2010.03, School of Economics, La Trobe University.
    17. Ronald P. Wolthoff, 2010. "Applications and Interviews: A Structural Analysis of Two-Sided Simultaneous Search," Working Papers tecipa-418, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    18. Matthew Doyle & Jacob Wong, 2013. "Wage Posting Without Full Commitment," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 16(2), pages 231-252, April.
    19. Matteo Richiardi, 2004. "A Search Model Of Unemployment And Firm Dynamics," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(02), pages 203-221.
    20. Eeckhout, Jan & Kircher, Philipp, 2010. "Sorting versus screening: Search frictions and competing mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(4), pages 1354-1385, July.

    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:ormsom:v:23:y:2021:i:3:p:620-636. 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.