IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transb/v104y2017icp290-316.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The decentralized field service routing problem

Author

Listed:
  • Avraham, Edison
  • Raviv, Tal
  • Khmelnitsky, Eugene

Abstract

Companies that provide service at geographically dispersed locations face the problem of determining the technician that will serve each location as well as setting the best route for each technician. Such a scenario is known as the field service routing problem. Large companies often outsource their field service tasks to several contractors. Each contractor may serve several companies. Since the contractors cannot share the information about the tasks of their other clients, the most common practice involves allocating the tasks to the contractors heuristically based on geographical considerations. In this approach, the tasks for which the contractors have already been committed to other companies are not considered. As a result, the allocation of new tasks can be inefficient. This study develops 2-stage task allocation mechanisms that cope with the problem and result in nearly optimal allocations.

Suggested Citation

  • Avraham, Edison & Raviv, Tal & Khmelnitsky, Eugene, 2017. "The decentralized field service routing problem," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 290-316.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:104:y:2017:i:c:p:290-316
    DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2017.07.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191261517305878
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.trb.2017.07.005?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    2. Zamorano, Emilio & Stolletz, Raik, 2017. "Branch-and-price approaches for the Multiperiod Technician Routing and Scheduling Problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(1), pages 55-68.
    3. Xu, Su Xiu & Huang, George Q., 2014. "Efficient auctions for distributed transportation procurement," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 47-64.
    4. Li, Jing-Quan & Mirchandani, Pitu B. & Borenstein, Denis, 2009. "Real-time vehicle rerouting problems with time windows," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(3), pages 711-727, May.
    5. Edward Clarke, 1971. "Multipart pricing of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 17-33, September.
    6. Cortés, Cristián E. & Gendreau, Michel & Rousseau, Louis Martin & Souyris, Sebastián & Weintraub, Andrés, 2014. "Branch-and-price and constraint programming for solving a real-life technician dispatching problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(1), pages 300-312.
    7. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    8. Huang, George Q. & Xu, Su Xiu, 2013. "Truthful multi-unit transportation procurement auctions for logistics e-marketplaces," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 127-148.
    9. Groves, Theodore, 1973. "Incentives in Teams," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 617-631, July.
    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. Hu, Xu & Yang, Zhaojun & Sun, Jun & Zhang, Yali, 2021. "Sharing economy of electric vehicle private charge posts," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 258-275.

    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. Yu, Hao & Huang, Min & Chao, Xiuli & Yue, Xiaohang, 2022. "Truthful multi-attribute multi-unit double auctions for B2B e-commerce logistics service transactions," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    2. Liang, Renchao & Wang, Junwei & Huang, Min & Jiang, Zhong-Zhong, 2020. "Truthful auctions for e-market logistics services procurement with quantity discounts," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 165-180.
    3. Xu, Su Xiu & Cheng, Meng & Huang, George Q., 2015. "Efficient intermodal transportation auctions for B2B e-commerce logistics with transaction costs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 322-337.
    4. Su Xiu Xu & George Q. Huang & Meng Cheng, 2017. "Truthful, Budget-Balanced Bundle Double Auctions for Carrier Collaboration," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(4), pages 1365-1386, November.
    5. Bian, Zheyong & Liu, Xiang & Bai, Yun, 2020. "Mechanism design for on-demand first-mile ridesharing," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 77-117.
    6. Ding, Xiaoshu & Qi, Qi & Jian, Sisi, 2024. "Truthful online double auctions for on-demand integrated ride-sourcing platforms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 317(3), pages 737-747.
    7. Ding, Xiaoshu & Qi, Qi & Jian, Sisi & Yang, Hai, 2023. "Mechanism design for Mobility-as-a-Service platform considering travelers’ strategic behavior and multidimensional requirements," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 1-30.
    8. Hara, Yusuke, 2018. "Behavioral mechanism design for transportation services: Laboratory experiments and preference elicitation cost," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 231-245.
    9. Xianghua Chu & Su Xiu Xu & Fulin Cai & Jiansheng Chen & Quande Qin, 2019. "An efficient auction mechanism for regional logistics synchronization," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 30(7), pages 2715-2731, October.
    10. Yotam Harchol & Dirk Bergemann & Nick Feamster & Eric Friedman & Arvind Krishnamurthy & Aurojit Panda & Sylvia Ratnasamy & Michael Schapira & Scott Shenker, 2020. "A Public Option for the Core," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2245, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    11. Xu, Su Xiu & Huang, George Q., 2014. "Efficient auctions for distributed transportation procurement," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 47-64.
    12. Robert W. Day & S. Raghavan, 2007. "Fair Payments for Efficient Allocations in Public Sector Combinatorial Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(9), pages 1389-1406, September.
    13. Xu, Su Xiu & Huang, George Q., 2013. "Transportation service procurement in periodic sealed double auctions with stochastic demand and supply," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 136-160.
    14. Xiao, Haohan & Xu, Meng & Gao, Ziyou, 2018. "Shared parking problem: A novel truthful double auction mechanism approach," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 40-69.
    15. Tafreshian, Amirmahdi & Masoud, Neda, 2022. "A truthful subsidy scheme for a peer-to-peer ridesharing market with incomplete information," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 130-161.
    16. Shrestha, Ratna K., 2017. "Menus of price-quantity contracts for inducing the truth in environmental regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-7.
    17. Mishra, Debasis & Parkes, David C., 2007. "Ascending price Vickrey auctions for general valuations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 335-366, January.
    18. Christoph Engel & Luigi Mittone & Azzurra Morreale, 2024. "Outcomes or participation? Experimentally testing competing sources of legitimacy for taxation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(2), pages 563-583, April.
    19. Mizukami, Hideki & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Wakayama, Takuma, 2003. "Strategy-Proof Sharing," Working Papers 1170, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    20. William H. Sandholm, 2005. "Negative Externalities and Evolutionary Implementation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(3), pages 885-915.

    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:eee:transb:v:104:y:2017:i:c:p:290-316. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/548/description#description .

    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.