IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormsom/v24y2022i1p305-314.html

Optimal Contract Under Asymmetric Information About Fairness

Author

Listed:
  • Valery Pavlov

    (Business School, University of Auckland, Auckland 1142, New Zealand)

  • Elena Katok

    (Naveen Jindal School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas 75080)

  • Wen Zhang

    (Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University, Waco, Texas 76798)

Abstract

Problem definition : To improve the poor performance of supply chains caused by misaligned incentives under the wholesale price contract, theory proposes coordinating contracts. However, a common finding of experimental studies testing such contracts is that they tend to yield only a marginal, if any, performance improvement over wholesale pricing. These studies identify several behavioral factors that are at play but none accounted for by the theory proposing coordinating contracts. Among them, identified as the single most detrimental for the supply chain performance, is incomplete information about preferences for fairness causing contract rejections. Can the supply chain performance be improved with a contract designed allowing for this type of information asymmetry? What does this contract (mechanism) look like? Academic/practical relevance : The extant research characterized the optimal contracting mechanisms for such important practical cases as the suppliers’ private information about production cost or the retailers’ private information about the end customer demand. The present study addresses the gap in another important practical case: when the source of information asymmetry is the private information about preferences for fairness. Methodology : The underlying research method is mechanism design. Results : We prove that the optimal mechanism consists of a single contract positioned on the Pareto frontier and characterize the optimal profit split between the supplier and the retailer. We show that, under a wide range of preferences for fairness, the efficiency loss because of private information is strictly positive, but exceptions are possible. We also show that the optimal mechanism can be implemented with a variety of commonly used in practice and widely studied in academic literature contracts, including the minimum order quantity and the two-part tariff ones. Managerial implications : We establish a direct link between a large volume of theoretical and empirical literature on social preferences with the research on supply chain contracts. Because rejections that are because of incomplete information are an important cause of contract inefficiency observed in the laboratory, managers should avoid take it or leave it offers when they negotiate contracts. Instead, the bargaining process should be geared toward discovering the extent of the fairness preferences of the contracting parties.

Suggested Citation

  • Valery Pavlov & Elena Katok & Wen Zhang, 2022. "Optimal Contract Under Asymmetric Information About Fairness," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 305-314, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:24:y:2022:i:1:p:305-314
    DOI: 10.1287/msom.2020.0945
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/msom.2020.0945
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/msom.2020.0945?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. Elena Katok & Diana Yan Wu, 2009. "Contracting in Supply Chains: A Laboratory Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1953-1968, December.
    2. Gérard P. Cachon & Martin A. Lariviere, 2001. "Contracting to Assure Supply: How to Share Demand Forecasts in a Supply Chain," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 629-646, May.
    3. Arnaud De Bruyn & Gary E. Bolton, 2008. "Estimating the Influence of Fairness on Bargaining Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(10), pages 1774-1791, October.
    4. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1986. "Fairness and the Assumptions of Economics," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 285-300, October.
    5. Ernan Haruvy & Elena Katok & Valery Pavlov, 2020. "Bargaining Process and Channel Efficiency," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(7), pages 2845-2860, July.
    6. Teck-Hua Ho & Juanjuan Zhang, 2008. "Designing Pricing Contracts for Boundedly Rational Customers: Does the Framing of the Fixed Fee Matter?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 686-700, April.
    7. Joseph J. Spengler, 1950. "Vertical Integration and Antitrust Policy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(4), pages 347-347.
    8. Abel P. Jeuland & Steven M. Shugan, 1983. "Managing Channel Profits," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 239-272.
    9. Myerson, Roger B, 1979. "Incentive Compatibility and the Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(1), pages 61-73, January.
    10. Barry Alan Pasternack, 1985. "Optimal Pricing and Return Policies for Perishable Commodities," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 166-176.
    11. Charles J. Corbett & Deming Zhou & Christopher S. Tang, 2004. "Designing Supply Contracts: Contract Type and Information Asymmetry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(4), pages 550-559, April.
    12. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    13. Noah Lim & Teck-Hua Ho, 2007. "Designing Price Contracts for Boundedly Rational Customers: Does the Number of Blocks Matter?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 312-326, 05-06.
    14. Niederhoff, Julie A. & Kouvelis, Panos, 2016. "Generous, spiteful, or profit maximizing suppliers in the wholesale price contract: A behavioral study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(2), pages 372-382.
    15. Forsythe Robert & Horowitz Joel L. & Savin N. E. & Sefton Martin, 1994. "Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 347-369, May.
    16. Tony Haitao Cui & Jagmohan S. Raju & Z. John Zhang, 2007. "Fairness and Channel Coordination," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(8), pages 1303-1314, August.
    17. James Andreoni & Marco Castillo & Ragan Petrie, 2003. "What Do Bargainers' Preferences Look Like? Experiments with a Convex Ultimatum Game," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 672-685, June.
    18. K. Sridhar Moorthy, 1987. "Comment—Managing Channel Profits: Comment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 375-379.
    19. Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
    20. Gérard P. Cachon & Martin A. Lariviere, 2005. "Supply Chain Coordination with Revenue-Sharing Contracts: Strengths and Limitations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(1), pages 30-44, January.
    21. Gibbard, Allan, 1973. "Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 587-601, July.
    22. Albert Y. Ha, 2001. "Supplier‐buyer contracting: Asymmetric cost information and cutoff level policy for buyer participation," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(1), pages 41-64, February.
    23. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard, 1986. "Fairness as a Constraint on Profit Seeking: Entitlements in the Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 728-741, September.
    24. 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.
    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. Liang, Nuobu & Zhang, Qingyu, 2026. "A differential game of ingredient branding supply chain with Nash bargaining fairness concern," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    2. Qian, Xiaohu & Huang, Min & Yin, Mingqiang & Zhang, Jiahua & Li, Yunxia, 2026. "Coordination of a dual-channel e-commerce platform supply chain with fairness concerns and financial constraints," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 294(C).
    3. Zongsen Yang & Xingyu Fu & Pin Gao & Ying-Ju Chen, 2024. "Fairness Regulation of Prices in Competitive Markets," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 1897-1917, September.
    4. Lin Chen & Hui Shen & Qiurui Liu & Congjun Rao & Jing Li & Mark Goh, 2026. "Joint optimization on green investment and contract design for sustainable supply chains with fairness concern," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 359(1), pages 243-281, April.
    5. Yini Zheng & Tiaojun Xiao, 2026. "Interaction between rebate strategy and wholesale-ordering contracts under retailer optimism and information asymmetry," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 356(1), pages 321-349, January.
    6. Xianjin Du & Huimin Zhan & Lulu Wang & Xiaoxi Zhu, 2026. "Two sides of a coin: analysis of manufacturer altruism and fairness on supply chain upstream innovation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 356(2), pages 785-829, January.
    7. Huang, He & Wu, Dandan & Xu, Hongyan, 2025. "Signaling or not? The pricing strategy under fairness concerns and cost information asymmetry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 321(3), pages 789-799.
    8. Wenqian Zhang & Haiyan Wang, 2023. "Optimal contract design for live streaming platforms under dual asymmetric information considering corporate social responsibility," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(6), pages 3537-3555, September.
    9. Wang, Zeming & Veldman, Jasper & Teunter, Ruud, 2025. "Process improvement under the reference price effect," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 322(3), pages 937-948.

    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. Roemer, Nils & Müller, Sven & Voigt, Guido, 2023. "A choice-based optimization approach for contracting in supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(1), pages 271-286.
    2. Wu, Diana Yan, 2013. "The impact of repeated interactions on supply chain contracts: A laboratory study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 3-15.
    3. Li, Zhong-Ping & Wang, Jian-Jun & Perera, Sandun & Shi, Jim (Junmin), 2022. "Coordination of a supply chain with Nash bargaining fairness concerns," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    4. Đula, Ivan & Größler, Andreas, 2021. "Inequity aversion in dynamically complex supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 309-322.
    5. Elena Katok & Diana Yan Wu, 2009. "Contracting in Supply Chains: A Laboratory Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1953-1968, December.
    6. Lennart C. Johnsen & Abdolkarim Sadrieh & Guido Voigt, 2021. "Short‐term vs. Long‐term Contracting: Empirical Assessment of the Ratchet Effect in Supply Chain Interaction," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(7), pages 2252-2272, July.
    7. Ozge Tuncel & Niyazi Taneri & Sameer Hasija, 2022. "Why Are Minimum Order Quantity Contracts Popular in Practice? A Behavioral Investigation," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 2166-2182, July.
    8. Teck-Hua Ho & Juanjuan Zhang, 2008. "Designing Pricing Contracts for Boundedly Rational Customers: Does the Framing of the Fixed Fee Matter?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 686-700, April.
    9. Becker-Peth, Michael & Thonemann, Ulrich W., 2016. "Reference points in revenue sharing contracts—How to design optimal supply chain contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1033-1049.
    10. Mai, Feng & Fry, Michael J. & Raturi, Amitabh S., 2016. "Supply-chain performance anomalies: Fairness concerns under private cost informationAuthor-Name: Qin, Fei," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 252(1), pages 170-182.
    11. Mingzhu Yu & Ruina Yang & Zelong Yi & Xuwen Cong, 2020. "Contracting in Ocean Shipping Market Under Asymmetric Information," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 37(02), pages 1-24, March.
    12. Messinger, Paul R., 2016. "The role of fairness in competitive supply chain relationships: An experimental studyAuthor-Name: Choi, Sungchul," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(3), pages 798-813.
    13. Sebastian Schiffels & Guido Voigt, 2021. "Capacity Reservation and Wholesale Price Contracts under Forecast Sharing: A Behavioral Assessment," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(10), pages 3579-3598, October.
    14. Z. Justin Ren & Morris A. Cohen & Teck H. Ho & Christian Terwiesch, 2010. "Information Sharing in a Long-Term Supply Chain Relationship: The Role of Customer Review Strategy," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 81-93, February.
    15. Avi Goldfarb & Teck-Hua Ho & Wilfred Amaldoss & Alexander Brown & Yan Chen & Tony Cui & Alberto Galasso & Tanjim Hossain & Ming Hsu & Noah Lim & Mo Xiao & Botao Yang, 2012. "Behavioral models of managerial decision-making," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 405-421, June.
    16. Haresh Gurnani & Murat Erkoc, 2008. "Supply contracts in manufacturer‐retailer interactions with manufacturer‐quality and retailer effort‐induced demand," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 200-217, April.
    17. Niederhoff, Julie A & Kouvelis, Panos, 2019. "Effective and necessary: Individual supplier behavior in revenue sharing and wholesale contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(3), pages 1060-1071.
    18. Xia Yan & Shaofu Du & Li Hu, 2020. "Supply chain performance for a risk inequity averse newsvendor," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 290(1), pages 897-921, July.
    19. Yinghao Zhang & Peiwen Yu & Tianjun Feng, 2024. "Full Quantity or Full Credit? Choosing the Right Buyback Policy for a Behavioral Retailer," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 2212-2230, November.
    20. Yinghao Zhang & Karen Donohue & Tony Haitao Cui, 2016. "Contract Preferences and Performance for the Loss-Averse Supplier: Buyback vs. Revenue Sharing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1734-1754, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:inm:ormsom:v:24:y:2022:i:1:p:305-314. 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.