IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v52y2006i6p865-880.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Bargaining Model for a First-Time Interaction Under Asymmetric Beliefs of Supply Reliability

Author

Listed:
  • Haresh Gurnani

    (Department of Management, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida 33124)

  • Mengze Shi

    (Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3E6, Canada)

Abstract

We consider the case of a first-time interaction between a buyer and a supplier who is unreliable in delivery. The supplier declares her estimate of the ability to meet the order obligations, but the buyer may have a different estimate, which may be higher or lower than the supplier's estimate. We derive the Nash bargaining solution and discuss the role of using a down-payment or nondelivery penalty in the contract. For the case of buyer overtrust, the down-payment contract maximizes channel profits when the supplier's estimate is public information. If the supplier's estimate is private information, a nonsymmetric contract is shown to be efficient and incentive compatible. For the case of buyer undertrust, the contract structure is quite different as both players choose not to include down-payments in the contract. When delivery estimates are public information, a nondelivery penalty contract is able to maximize channel profits if the buyer uses the supplier's estimate in making the ordering decision. If estimates are private information, channel profits are maximized only if the true estimates of both players are not far part. We also discuss the effect of different risk profiles on the nature of the bargaining solution. In three extensions of the model, we consider the following variants of the basic problem. First, we analyze the effect of early versus late negotiation on the bargaining solution. Then, we study the case of endogenous supply reliability, and finally, for the case of repeated interactions, we discuss the impact of updating delivery estimates on the order quantity and negotiated prices of future orders.

Suggested Citation

  • Haresh Gurnani & Mengze Shi, 2006. "A Bargaining Model for a First-Time Interaction Under Asymmetric Beliefs of Supply Reliability," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 865-880, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:52:y:2006:i:6:p:865-880
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1050.0498
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0498
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0498?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. Nash, John, 1953. "Two-Person Cooperative Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 21(1), pages 128-140, April.
    2. Rajeev Kohli & Heungsoo Park, 1989. "A Cooperative Game Theory Model of Quantity Discounts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(6), pages 693-707, June.
    3. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    4. Candace Arai Yano & Hau L. Lee, 1995. "Lot Sizing with Random Yields: A Review," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 43(2), pages 311-334, April.
    5. Mordechai Henig & Yigal Gerchak, 1990. "The Structure of Periodic Review Policies in the Presence of Random Yield," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 634-643, August.
    6. Scott A. Neslin & Leonard Greenhalgh, 1986. "The Ability of Nash's Theory of Cooperative Games to Predict the Outcomes of Buyer-Seller Negotiations: A Dyad-Level Test," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 480-498, April.
    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. Ghosh, Debabrata & Shah, Janat, 2015. "Supply chain analysis under green sensitive consumer demand and cost sharing contract," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 319-329.
    2. Anocha Aribarg & Neeraj Arora & Moon Young Kang, 2010. "Predicting Joint Choice Using Individual Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(1), pages 139-157, 01-02.
    3. Chakraborty, Tulika & Chauhan, Satyaveer S. & Ouhimmou, Mustapha, 2019. "Cost-sharing mechanism for product quality improvement in a supply chain under competition," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 566-587.
    4. Voelkel, Michael A. & Sachs, Anna-Lena & Thonemann, Ulrich W., 2020. "An aggregation-based approximate dynamic programming approach for the periodic review model with random yield," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(2), pages 286-298.
    5. Guth, Werner & Ritzberger, Klaus & van Damme, Eric, 2004. "On the Nash bargaining solution with noise," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 697-713, June.
    6. Dinar, Ariel, 1989. "Application of the Nash Bargaining Model to a Problem of Efficient Resources Use and Cost-Benefit Allocation," 1989 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 2, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 270685, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Hsieh, Chung-Chi & Lai, Hsing-Hua, 2017. "Capacity allocation with differentiated product demands under dual sourcing," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 757-769.
    8. Volodymyr Babich & Simone Marinesi & Gerry Tsoukalas, 2021. "Does Crowdfunding Benefit Entrepreneurs and Venture Capital Investors?," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 508-524, March.
    9. Ley, Eduardo, 2006. "Statistical inference as a bargaining game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 142-149, October.
    10. Song, Yuyue & Wang, Yunzeng, 2017. "Periodic review inventory systems with fixed order cost and uniform random yield," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(1), pages 106-117.
    11. Yu, Shasha & Lei, Ming & Deng, Honghui, 2023. "Evaluation to fixed-sum-outputs DMUs by non-oriented equilibrium efficient frontier DEA approach with Nash bargaining-based selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    12. repec:eee:labchp:v:2:y:1986:i:c:p:1039-1089 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Yashiv, Eran, 2007. "Labor search and matching in macroeconomics," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(8), pages 1859-1895, November.
    14. Güth, Werner, 1998. "Sequential versus independent commitment: An indirect evolutionary analysis of bargaining rules," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 1998,5, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    15. Iraklis Kollias & John Leventides & Vassilios G. Papavassiliou, 2024. "On the solution of games with arbitrary payoffs: An application to an over‐the‐counter financial market," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 1877-1895, April.
    16. Kutzner, Sarah C. & Kiesmüller, Gudrun P., 2013. "Optimal control of an inventory-production system with state-dependent random yield," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 227(3), pages 444-452.
    17. Saurabh Bansal & Mahesh Nagarajan, 2017. "Product Portfolio Management with Production Flexibility in Agribusiness," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 914-930, August.
    18. van Damme, E.E.C., 2000. "John Nash and the analysis of rational behavior," Other publications TiSEM cf34a879-fd1c-4588-9646-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Takeuchi, Ai & Veszteg, Róbert F. & Kamijo, Yoshio & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2022. "Bargaining over a jointly produced pie: The effect of the production function on bargaining outcomes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 169-198.
    20. Lili Liu & Guochun Tang & Baoqiang Fan & Xingpeng Wang, 2015. "Two-person cooperative games on scheduling problems in outpatient pharmacy dispensing process," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 938-948, November.
    21. Naeve-Steinweg, Elisabeth, 2002. "Mechanisms supporting the Kalai-Smorodinsky solution," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 25-36, September.

    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:ormnsc:v:52:y:2006:i:6:p:865-880. 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.