IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Split-Award Procurement Auctions with Uncertain Scale Economies: Theory and Data

  • James J. Anton
  • Sandro Brusco
  • Giuseppe Lopomo

In a number of observed procurements, the buyer has employed an auction format that allows for a split-award outcome. We focus on settings where the range of uncertainty regarding scale economies is large and, depending on cost realizations, the efficient allocations include split-award outcomes as well as sole-source outcomes (one active supplier). We examine the price performance and efficiency properties of split-award auctions under asymmetric information. In equilibrium, both award outcomes can occur--the split-award outcome arises only when it minimizes total costs; sole-source outcomes, however, occur too often from an efficiency viewpoint. Equilibrium bids involve pooling at a common price for the split award, and separation for sole-source awards. We provide conditions under which the buyer and suppliers all benefit from a split-award format relative to a winner-take-all unit auction format. Model predictions are assessed with data on submitted ‘step-ladder’ bid prices for a US defense split-award procurement.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1590324_code1070428.pdf?abstractid=1589715&mirid=1
File Function: main text
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Duke University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 10-32.

as
in new window

Length: 32
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:duk:dukeec:10-32
Contact details of provider: Postal: Department of Economics Duke University 213 Social Sciences Building Box 90097 Durham, NC 27708-0097
Phone: (919) 660-1800
Fax: (919) 684-8974
Web page: http://econ.duke.edu/

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Shane M. Greenstein, 1993. "Did Installed Base Given an Incumbent Any (Measurable) Advantages in Federal Computer Procurement?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(1), pages 19-39, Spring.
  2. Roman Inderst, 2008. "Single sourcing versus multiple sourcing," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(1), pages 199-213.
  3. John McMillan, 2003. "Market Design: The Policy Uses of Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 139-144, May.
  4. Marshall, Robert C & Meurer, Michael J & Richard, Jean-Francois, 1994. "Litigation Settlement and Collusion," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 109(1), pages 211-39, February.
  5. Riordan, Michael H, 1996. "Contracting with Qualified Suppliers," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(1), pages 115-28, February.
  6. Thomas G. McGuire & Michael H. Riordan, 1991. "Incomplete Information and Optimal Market Structure: Public Purchases from Private Providers," Papers 0010, Boston University - Industry Studies Programme.
  7. Anton, James J & Yao, Dennis A, 1992. "Coordination in Split Award Auctions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 107(2), pages 681-707, May.
  8. Thomas P. Lyon, 2006. "DOES DUAL SOURCING LOWER PROCUREMENT COSTS? -super-* ," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 223-252, 06.
  9. Wedad J. Elmaghraby, 2000. "Supply Contract Competition and Sourcing Policies," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 2(4), pages 350-371, April.
  10. Bernheim, B Douglas & Whinston, Michael D, 1986. "Menu Auctions, Resource Allocation, and Economic Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 101(1), pages 1-31, February.
  11. Dana, James Jr. & Spier, Kathryn E., 1994. "Designing a private industry : Government auctions with endogenous market structure," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 127-147, January.
  12. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 1992. "Regulation by Duopoly," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(3), pages 507-33, Fall.
  13. Wilson, Robert, 1979. "Auctions of Shares," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 675-89, November.
  14. Dorothy E. Klotz & Kalyan Chatterjee, 1995. "Dual Sourcing in Repeated Procurement Competitions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(8), pages 1317-1327, August.
  15. William P. Rogerson, 1994. "Economic Incentives and the Defense Procurement Process," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 65-90, Fall.
  16. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 1993. "A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121743, June.
  17. 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.
  18. James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 1989. "Split Awards, Procurement, and Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(4), pages 538-552, Winter.
  19. Gérard P. Cachon & Fuqiang Zhang, 2007. "Obtaining Fast Service in a Queueing System via Performance-Based Allocation of Demand," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 408-420, March.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:duk:dukeec:10-32. 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: (Department of Economics Webmaster)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.