IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zewdip/327107.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Auctions vs. negotiations: The role of communication in an experiment with procurement managers

Author

Listed:
  • Fugger, Nicolas
  • Gillen, Philippe
  • Gretschko, Vitali
  • Kokott, Gian-Marco
  • Riehm, Tobias

Abstract

We investigate how buyer-supplier communication affects procurement prices, comparing auctions without direct communication to negotiations allowing it. In controlled experiments involving students and procurement professionals, we find communication increases prices, disadvantaging buyers. Negotiation analyses show lower initial offers, negotiation-focused dialogue, and emphasizing competition help reduce prices. Contrary to conventional wisdom, auctions without communication often yield better procurement outcomes, especially in competitive markets. Our results suggest managers should reconsider assumptions about experienced negotiators achieving superior deals and instead favor procurement auctions with limited communication to secure lower prices.

Suggested Citation

  • Fugger, Nicolas & Gillen, Philippe & Gretschko, Vitali & Kokott, Gian-Marco & Riehm, Tobias, 2025. "Auctions vs. negotiations: The role of communication in an experiment with procurement managers," ZEW Discussion Papers 25-039, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:327107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/327107/1/1936353555.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Qi Feng & Guoming Lai & Lauren Xiaoyuan Lu, 2015. "Dynamic Bargaining in a Supply Chain with Asymmetric Demand Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(2), pages 301-315, February.
    2. Jeremy Bulow & Paul Klemperer, 2009. "Why Do Sellers (Usually) Prefer Auctions?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1544-1575, September.
    3. Jason Shachat & Lijia Tan, 2015. "An Experimental Investigation of Auctions and Bargaining in Procurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1036-1051, May.
    4. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    5. Charles J. Thomas & Bart J. Wilson, 2005. "Verifiable Offers and the Relationship Between Auctions and Multilateral Negotiations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(506), pages 1016-1031, October.
    6. Stephen Leider & William S. Lovejoy, 2016. "Bargaining in Supply Chains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 3039-3058, October.
    7. Ernan Haruvy & Elena Katok & Valery Pavlov, 2020. "Bargaining Process and Channel Efficiency," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(7), pages 2845-2860, July.
    8. Gary E. Bolton & Kalyan Chatterjee & Kathleen L. McGinn, 2013. "How Communication Links Influence Coalition Bargaining: A Laboratory Investigation," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Bargaining in the Shadow of the Market Selected Papers on Bilateral and Multilateral Bargaining, chapter 6, pages 113-128, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Heinrich, Timo, 2012. "Communication and reputation in procurement auctions — Some empirical evidence," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 164-167.
    10. Charles J. Thomas & Bart J. Wilson, 2002. "A Comparison of Auctions and Multilateral Negotiations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(1), pages 140-155, Spring.
    11. Bulow, Jeremy & Klemperer, Paul, 1996. "Auctions versus Negotiations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 180-194, March.
    12. Gary E. Bolton & Axel Ockenfels & Ulrich W. Thonemann, 2012. "Managers and Students as Newsvendors," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(12), pages 2225-2233, December.
    13. Jeremy Bulow & Paul Klemperer, 2009. "Why Do Sellers (Usually) Prefer Auctions?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1544-75, September.
    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. Yuen Leng Chow & Isa E. Hafalir & Abdullah Yavas, 2015. "Auction versus Negotiated Sale: Evidence from Real Estate Sales," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 43(2), pages 432-470, June.
    2. Bacchiega, Emanuele & Bonroy, Olivier & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2020. "Auctions vs. negotiations in vertically related markets," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    3. Thomas, Charles J., 2018. "An alternating-offers model of multilateral negotiations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 269-293.
    4. Philippe Choné & Laurent Linnemer, 2025. "Flexclusivity: Exclusive Agreements with Competitive Flexibility," CESifo Working Paper Series 12134, CESifo.
    5. Sweeting, Andrew & Bhattacharya, Vivek, 2015. "Selective entry and auction design," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 189-207.
    6. Philippe Jehiel & Laurent Lamy, 2020. "On the Benefits of Set-Asides," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 1655-1696.
    7. Gregory E. Kersten & Tomasz Wachowicz & Margaret Kersten, 2016. "Competition, Transparency, and Reciprocity: A Comparative Study of Auctions and Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 693-722, July.
    8. He, Chusu & Milne, Alistair & Ataullah, Ali, 2023. "What explains delays in public procurement decisions?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    9. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    10. Chen, Jiafeng & Kominers, Scott Duke, 2021. "Auctioneers sometimes prefer entry fees to extra bidders," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    11. Sebastián D. Bauer, 2023. "Buyers’ welfare maximizing auction design," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(2), pages 555-567, June.
    12. Cheng, Harrison, 2015. "Participation and exclusion in auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 77-80.
    13. Wang, Hong, 2013. "Contingent payment auction mechanism in multidimensional procurement auctions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(2), pages 404-413.
    14. Fabio Michelucci, 2022. "Promoting Entry and Efficiency via Reserve Prices," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-7, June.
    15. Robert Kleinberg & Bo Waggoner & E. Glen Weyl, 2016. "Descending Price Optimally Coordinates Search," Papers 1603.07682, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2016.
    16. Che, XiaoGang & Lee, Peter & Yang, Yibai, 2013. "The impact of resale on entry in second price auctions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 163-168.
    17. Pagnozzi, Marco & Rosato, Antonio, 2016. "Entry by takeover: Auctions vs. bilateral negotiations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 68-84.
    18. Karen Donohue & Özalp Özer, 2020. "Behavioral Operations: Past, Present, and Future," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 191-202, January.
    19. Decio Coviello & Andrea Guglielmo & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2015. "The Effect of Discretion on Procurement Performance," CEIS Research Paper 361, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 17 Nov 2015.
    20. Andrew M. Davis & Bin Hu & Kyle Hyndman & Anyan Qi, 2022. "Procurement for Assembly Under Asymmetric Information: Theory and Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2694-2713, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions

    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:zbw:zewdip:327107. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.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.