IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orserv/v16y2024i1p22-41.html

The Dual Effects of Team Contest Design on On-Demand Service Work Schedules

Author

Listed:
  • Tingting Dong

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong 999077, China)

  • Xiaotong Sun

    (Thrust of Intelligent Transportation, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou), Guangzhou, Guangdong 511400, China)

  • Qi Luo

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina 29634)

  • Jian Wang

    (Department of Transportation Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, Heilongjiang 150001, China)

  • Yafeng Yin

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48107)

Abstract

Emerging on-demand service platforms (OSPs) have recently embraced teamwork as a strategy for stimulating workers’ productivity and mediating temporal supply and demand imbalances. This research investigates the team contest scheme design problem considering work schedules. Introducing teams on OSPs creates a hierarchical single-leader multi-follower game. The leader (platform) establishes rewards and intrateam revenue-sharing rules for distributing workers’ payoffs. Each follower (team) competes with others by coordinating the schedules of its team members to maximize the total expected utility. The concurrence of interteam competition and intrateam coordination causes dual effects, which are captured by an equilibrium analysis of the followers’ game. To align the platform’s interest with workers’ heterogeneous working-time preferences, we propose a profit-maximizing contest scheme consisting of a winner’s reward and time-varying payments. A novel algorithm that combines Bayesian optimization, duality, and a penalty method solves the optimal scheme in the nonconvex equilibrium-constrained problem. Our results indicate that teamwork is a useful strategy with limitations. Under the proposed scheme, team contest always benefits workers. Intrateam coordination helps teams strategically mitigate the negative externalities caused by overcompetition among workers. For the platform, the optimal scheme can direct teams’ schedules toward more profitable market equilibria when workers have inaccurate perceptions of the market.

Suggested Citation

  • Tingting Dong & Xiaotong Sun & Qi Luo & Jian Wang & Yafeng Yin, 2024. "The Dual Effects of Team Contest Design on On-Demand Service Work Schedules," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 22-41, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orserv:v:16:y:2024:i:1:p:22-41
    DOI: 10.1287/serv.2023.0320
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/serv.2023.0320
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/serv.2023.0320?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. M. Keith Chen & Judith A. Chevalier & Peter E. Rossi & Emily Oehlsen, 2019. "The Value of Flexible Work: Evidence from Uber Drivers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(6), pages 2735-2794.
    2. Baik, Kyung Hwan & Lee, Sanghack, 2007. "Collective rent seeking when sharing rules are private information," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 768-776, September.
    3. Hai Yang & Min Ye & Wilson Hon-Chung Tang & Sze Chun Wong, 2005. "A Multiperiod Dynamic Model of Taxi Services with Endogenous Service Intensity," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 501-515, June.
    4. Mark Armstrong, 2006. "Competition in two‐sided markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, September.
    5. Jean‐Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2006. "Two‐sided markets: a progress report," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 645-667, September.
    6. Nitzan, Shmuel & Ueda, Kaoru, 2011. "Prize sharing in collective contests," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 678-687, June.
    7. Cheikbossian, Guillaume, 2012. "The collective action problem: Within-group cooperation and between-group competition in a repeated rent-seeking game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 68-82.
    8. Tong, Tingting & Dai, Hongyan & Xiao, Qin & Yan, Nina, 2020. "Will dynamic pricing outperform? Theoretical analysis and empirical evidence from O2O on-demand food service market," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 375-385.
    9. Katsuya Kobayashi & Hideo Konishi, 2021. "Effort complementarity and sharing rules in group contests," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(2), pages 205-221, February.
    10. Wei Ai & Yan Chen & Qiaozhu Mei & Jieping Ye & Lingyu Zhang, 2023. "Putting Teams into the Gig Economy: A Field Experiment at a Ride-Sharing Platform," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(9), pages 5336-5353, September.
    11. Boidurjo Rick Mukhopadhyay & Chris R. Chatwin, 2020. "The Significance of Herzberg and Taylor for the Gig Economy of China: Evaluating Gigger Incentives for Meituan and Ele.me," International Journal of Applied Behavioral Economics (IJABE), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, October.
    12. Shmuel Nitzan, 2008. "Collective Rent Dissipation," Springer Books, in: Roger D. Congleton & Arye L. Hillman & Kai A. Konrad (ed.), 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 1, pages 309-321, Springer.
    13. Barry J. Nalebuff & Joseph E. Stiglitz, 1983. "Prices and Incentives: Towards a General Theory of Compensation and Competition," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(1), pages 21-43, Spring.
    14. Jong-Shi Pang & Masao Fukushima, 2005. "Quasi-variational inequalities, generalized Nash equilibria, and multi-leader-follower games," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 21-56, January.
    15. Skaperdas, Stergios, 1998. "On the Formation of Alliances in Conflict and Contests," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 96(1-2), pages 25-42, 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. Paul Pecorino, 2015. "Olson’s Logic of Collective Action at fifty," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 243-262, March.
    2. Hideo Konishi & Nicolas Sahuguet & Benoît S. Y. Crutzen, 2024. "Allocation rules of indivisible prizes in team contests," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 78(1), pages 69-100, August.
    3. Dhritiman Gupta, 2023. "Prize sharing rules in collective contests: when do social norms matter?," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 27(1), pages 221-244, February.
    4. Paul Pecorino, 2016. "Individual welfare and the group size paradox," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 137-152, July.
    5. Shmuel Nitzan & Kaoru Ueda, 2014. "Intra-group heterogeneity in collective contests," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(1), pages 219-238, June.
    6. Priks, Mikael, 2011. "Firm competition and incentive pay: Rent seeking at work," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 154-156.
    7. David P. Baron, 2018. "Disruptive Entrepreneurship and Dual Purpose Strategies: The Case of Uber," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 439-462, June.
    8. Brian Roberson, 2026. "Existence of Equilibrium Mechanisms in Generalized Principal-Agent Problems with Interacting Teams," Papers 2602.20281, arXiv.org, revised May 2026.
    9. Maria Arbatskaya & Hideo Konishi, 2025. "Dynamic team contests with complementary efforts," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 29(3), pages 611-633, September.
    10. Pau Balart & Sabine Flamand & Orestis Troumpounis, 2016. "Strategic choice of sharing rules in collective contests," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(2), pages 239-262, February.
    11. Liu Ming & Tunay Tunca & Yi Xu & Weiming Zhu, 2025. "Market Formation, Pricing, and Value Generation in Ride-Hailing Services," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 1551-1570, September.
    12. Shmuel Nitzan & Kaoru Ueda, 2018. "Selective incentives and intragroup heterogeneity in collective contests," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 20(4), pages 477-498, August.
    13. Dhritiman Gupta, 2020. "Prize Sharing Rules in Collective Contests: Towards Strategic Foundations," Discussion Papers 20-01, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    14. Wei, Wanying & Liu, Weihua & Tang, Ou & Dong, Chuanwen & Liang, Yanjie, 2023. "CSR investment for a two-sided platform: Network externality and risk aversion," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 694-712.
    15. Pau Balart & Sabine Flamand & Orestis Troumpounis, 2014. "Strategic choice of sharing rules in collective contests," Working Papers 64402108, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    16. Daniel Cardona & Jenny Freitas & Antoni Rubí-Barceló, 2023. "Polarization and conflict among groups with heterogeneous members," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(1), pages 199-219, July.
    17. Stefano Barbieri & David Malueg & Iryna Topolyan, 2014. "The best-shot all-pay (group) auction with complete information," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 57(3), pages 603-640, November.
    18. Nicolas Querou, 2018. "Interacting collective action problems in the commons," Working Papers hal-02790606, HAL.
    19. Francesco Trevisan, 2020. "Optimal prize allocations in group contests," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(3), pages 431-451, October.
    20. Wang, Hai & Yang, Hai, 2019. "Ridesourcing systems: A framework and review," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 122-155.

    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:orserv:v:16:y:2024:i:1:p:22-41. 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.