IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/9757.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Auctions Versus Negotiations in Procurement: An Empirical Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Bajari
  • Robert S. McMillan
  • Steve Tadelis

Abstract

Should the buyer of a customized good use competitive bidding or negotiation to select a contractor? To shed light on this question, we offer a framework that compares auctions with negotiations. We then examine a comprehensive data set of private sector building contracts awarded in Northern California during the years 1995-2000. The analysis suggests a number of potential limitations to the use of auctions. Auctions perform poorly when projects are complex, contractual design is incomplete and there are few available bidders. Furthermore, auctions stifle communication between buyers and the sellers, preventing the buyer from utilizing the contractor's expertise when designing the project. Some implications of these results for procurement in the public sector are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Bajari & Robert S. McMillan & Steve Tadelis, 2003. "Auctions Versus Negotiations in Procurement: An Empirical Analysis," NBER Working Papers 9757, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:9757
    Note: IO
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w9757.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bajari, Patrick & Tadelis, Steven, 2001. "Incentives versus Transaction Costs: A Theory of Procurement Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(3), pages 387-407, Autumn.
    2. Milgrom, Paul & Shannon, Chris, 1994. "Monotone Comparative Statics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(1), pages 157-180, January.
    3. Porter, Robert H, 1995. "The Role of Information in U.S. Offshore Oil and Gas Lease Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(1), pages 1-27, January.
    4. Daniel A. Ackerberg & Maristella Botticini, 2002. "Endogenous Matching and the Empirical Determinants of Contract Form," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(3), pages 564-591, June.
    5. Abhijit V. Banerjee & Esther Duflo, 2000. "Reputation Effects and the Limits of Contracting: A Study of the Indian Software Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(3), pages 989-1017.
    6. Gary Chamberlain, 1980. "Analysis of Covariance with Qualitative Data," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 47(1), pages 225-238.
    7. R. Preston McAfee & John McMillan, 1986. "Bidding for Contracts: A Principal-Agent Analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(3), pages 326-338, Autumn.
    8. McAfee, R Preston & McMillan, John, 1987. "Auctions and Bidding," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 25(2), pages 699-738, June.
    9. Tirole, Jean, 1986. "Procurement and Renegotiation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(2), pages 235-259, April.
    10. Paarsch, Harry J., 1992. "Deciding between the common and private value paradigms in empirical models of auctions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 191-215.
    11. 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.
    12. Manelli, Alejandro M & Vincent, Daniel R, 1995. "Optimal Procurement Mechanisms," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(3), pages 591-620, May.
    13. 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, April.
    14. Patrick Bajari & Lixin Ye, 2001. "Competition Versus Collusion in Procurement Auctions: Identification and Testing," Working Papers 01001, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    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. François MARECHAL, 2003. "Should we base procurement rules on the competition of linear incentive contracts ?," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 03.07, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    2. Nakabayashi, Jun, 2013. "Small business set-asides in procurement auctions: An empirical analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 28-44.
    3. Bappaditya Mukhopadhyay, 2011. "Evaluating Public Procurement," Review of Market Integration, India Development Foundation, vol. 3(1), pages 21-68, April.
    4. Hensher, David A. & Ho, Chinh & Knowles, Louise, 2016. "Efficient contracting and incentive agreements between regulators and bus operators: The influence of risk preferences of contracting agents on contract choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 22-40.
    5. Surajeet Chakravarty & W. Bentley MacLeod, 2006. "Construction Contracts (or “How to Get the Right Building at the Right Price?”)," CESifo Working Paper Series 1714, CESifo.
    6. Paul H. Jensen & Robin E. Stonecash, 2004. "The Efficiency of Public Sector Outsourcing Contracts: A Literature Review," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n29, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    7. Bergman, Mats A. & Johansson, Per & Lundberg, Sofia & Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2016. "Privatization and quality: Evidence from elderly care in Sweden," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 109-119.
    8. Yongmin Chen & Ron Smith, 2001. "Equilibrium Cost Overruns," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 2(2), pages 401-414, November.
    9. Herweg, Fabian & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2014. "Auctions vs. Negotiations:The Effects of Inefficient Renegotiation," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 484, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    10. Herweg, Fabian & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2017. "Auctions versus Negotiations," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 12, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    11. Patrick Bajari & Stephanie Houghton & Steve Tadelis, 2006. "Bidding for Incomplete Contracts: An Empirical Analysis," NBER Working Papers 12051, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Surajeet Chakravarty & W. Bentley MacLeod, 2004. "On the Efficiency of Standard Contracts the Case of Construction," Working Papers 874, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    13. Corrado Di Maria & Ian A. Lange & Emiliya Lazarova, 2014. "A Look Upstream: Electricity Market Restructuring, Risk, Procurement Contracts and Efficiency," CESifo Working Paper Series 5124, CESifo.
    14. Di Maria, Corrado & Lange, Ian & Lazarova, Emiliya, 2018. "A look upstream: Market restructuring, risk, procurement contracts and efficiency," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 35-83.
    15. Surajeet Chakravarty & Bentley MacLeod, 2004. "On the Efficiency of Standard Contracts the Case of Construction," Working Papers 874, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    16. Paul H. Jensen & Robin E. Stonecash, 2005. "Contract Efficiency in the Presence of Demand and Cost Uncertainty," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2005n01, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    17. Ranjani Krishnan & Deepa Mani, 2020. "Uncertainty and Compensation Design in Strategic Interfirm Contracts†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 542-574, March.
    18. He, Chusu & Milne, Alistair & Ataullah, Ali, 2023. "What explains delays in public procurement decisions?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    19. 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.
    20. Barbosa, Klenio, 2009. "Free Riding in Procurement Design," TSE Working Papers 09-128, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L0 - Industrial Organization - - General
    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:9757. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.