IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormsom/v16y2014i3p346-364.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Empirical Analysis of Price, Quality, and Incumbency in Procurement Auctions

Author

Listed:
  • Tunay I. Tunca

    (Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742)

  • D. J. Wu

    (Georgia Institute of Technology, Scheller College of Business, Atlanta, Georgia 30308)

  • Fang (Vivian) Zhong

    (Zurich Financial Services Group, 8002 Zurich, Switzerland)

Abstract

The use of multiattribute auctions for procurement of products and services when both price and quality matter is becoming more frequent. Such auctions often employ scoring rules and are open ended in winner determination. Yet there is a significant gap in the literature on the efficiency of these procurement mechanisms. In this paper, providing a theoretical model and utilizing data from legal service procurement auctions, we study how open-ended scoring auctions can be used effectively in procurement and demonstrate the roles supplier quality and incumbency play in this process. We demonstrate that open-ended auctions can generate substantial savings to a buyer without compromising quality. We study the underlying mechanism and show how the auction format can work to achieve such performance. We find that the buyer's revealed preferences significantly differ from her stated preferences. Finally, we contribute to the understanding of the role of incumbency in procurement auctions by providing evidence that what may be perceived as incumbency bias can in fact be a revelation of preference for quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Tunay I. Tunca & D. J. Wu & Fang (Vivian) Zhong, 2014. "An Empirical Analysis of Price, Quality, and Incumbency in Procurement Auctions," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 346-364, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:16:y:2014:i:3:p:346-364
    DOI: 10.1287/msom.2014.0485
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/msom.2014.0485
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/msom.2014.0485?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. Gregory Lewis & Patrick Bajari, 2011. "Procurement Contracting With Time Incentives: Theory and Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(3), pages 1173-1211.
    2. Dimitris Kostamis & Damian R. Beil & Izak Duenyas, 2009. "Total-Cost Procurement Auctions: Impact of Suppliers' Cost Adjustments on Auction Format Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1985-1999, December.
    3. Dakshina G. De Silva & Timothy Dunne & Georgia Kosmopoulou, 2003. "An Empirical Analysis of Entrant and Incumbent Bidding in Road Construction Auctions," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 295-316, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Leonardo Rezende, 2009. "Biased procurement auctions," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 38(1), pages 169-185, January.
    6. Farrell, Joseph & Shapiro, Carl, 1989. "Optimal Contracts with Lock-In," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(1), pages 51-68, March.
    7. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, April.
    8. Cabral, Luis M B & Greenstein, Shane, 1990. "Switching Costs and Bidding Parity in Government Procurement of Computer Systems," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 453-469, Fall.
    9. John Asker & Estelle Cantillon, 2008. "Properties of scoring auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(1), pages 69-85, March.
    10. Elena Krasnokutskaya & Kyungchul Song & Xun Tang, 2013. "The Role of Quality in Service Markets Organized as Multi-Attribute Auctions," PIER Working Paper Archive 13-053, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    11. John Asker & Estelle Cantillon, 2010. "Procurement when price and quality matter," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(1), pages 1-34, March.
    12. Colucci, Domenico & Doni, Nicola & Valori, Vincenzo, 2012. "Preferential treatment in procurement auctions through information revelation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(3), pages 883-886.
    13. Eli M. Snir & Lorin M. Hitt, 2003. "Costly Bidding in Online Markets for IT Services," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(11), pages 1504-1520, November.
    14. Joseph Farrell & Nancy T. Gallini, 1988. "Second-Sourcing as a Commitment: Monopoly Incentives to Attract Competition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 103(4), pages 673-694.
    15. Zhixi Wan & Damian R. Beil & Elena Katok, 2012. "When Does It Pay to Delay Supplier Qualification? Theory and Experiments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(11), pages 2057-2075, November.
    16. Ching-Hua Chen-Ritzo & Terry P. Harrison & Anthony M. Kwasnica & Douglas J. Thomas, 2005. "Better, Faster, Cheaper: An Experimental Analysis of a Multiattribute Reverse Auction Mechanism with Restricted Information Feedback," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(12), pages 1753-1762, December.
    17. 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.
    18. Richard Engelbrecht-Wiggans & Ernan Haruvy & Elena Katok, 2007. "A Comparison of Buyer-Determined and Price-Based Multiattribute Mechanisms," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 629-641, 09-10.
    19. Patrick Bajari & Stephanie Houghton & Steven Tadelis, 2014. "Bidding for Incomplete Contracts: An Empirical Analysis of Adaptation Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1288-1319, April.
    20. Wedad J. Elmaghraby, 2000. "Supply Contract Competition and Sourcing Policies," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 2(4), pages 350-371, April.
    21. Tunay I. Tunca & Stefanos A. Zenios, 2006. "Supply Auctions and Relational Contracts for Procurement," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 43-67, February.
    22. Wedad J. Elmaghraby & Elena Katok & Natalia Santamaría, 2012. "A Laboratory Investigation of Rank Feedback in Procurement Auctions," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 128-144, January.
    23. Joel S. Demski & David E.M. Sappington & Pablo T. Spiller, 1987. "Managing Supplier Switching," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(1), pages 77-97, Spring.
    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. Basu, Arnab & Jain, Tarun & Hazra, Jishnu, 2018. "Supplier selection under production learning and process improvements," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 411-420.
    2. Qian, Cheng & Anderson, Edward, 2020. "Buyer’s optimal information revelation strategy in procurement auctions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(3), pages 1011-1025.
    3. Daniel Montanera & Abhay Nath Mishra & T. S. Raghu, 2022. "Mitigating Risk Selection in Healthcare Entitlement Programs: A Beneficiary-Level Competitive Bidding Approach," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1221-1247, December.
    4. Ruth Beer & Ignacio Rios & Daniela Saban, 2021. "Increased Transparency in Procurement: The Role of Peer Effects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(12), pages 7511-7534, December.
    5. Qian, Xiaohu & Fang, Shu-Cherng & Huang, Min & Wang, Xingwei, 2019. "Winner determination of loss-averse buyers with incomplete information in multiattribute reverse auctions for clean energy device procurement," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 276-292.
    6. Gordon Burtch & Yili Hong & Senthil Kumar, 2021. "When Does Dispute Resolution Substitute for a Reputation System? Empirical Evidence from a Service Procurement Platform," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(6), pages 1565-1582, June.
    7. Antonio Moreno & Christian Terwiesch, 2014. "Doing Business with Strangers: Reputation in Online Service Marketplaces," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 865-886, December.
    8. Alibeiki, Hedayat & Gümüş, Mehmet, 2020. "Supply competition under quality scores: Motivations, information sharing and credibility," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    9. Huang, Min & Qian, Xiaohu & Fang, Shu-Cherng & Wang, Xingwei, 2016. "Winner determination for risk aversion buyers in multi-attribute reverse auction," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 184-200.

    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. Stoll, Sebastian & Zöttl, Gregor, 2014. "Transparency in Buyer-Determined Auctions: Should Quality be Private or Public?," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 459, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    2. Stoll, Sebastian & Zöttl, Gregor, 2012. "Information Disclosure in Dynamic Buyer-Determined Procurement Auctions: An Empirical Study," VfS Annual Conference 2012 (Goettingen): New Approaches and Challenges for the Labor Market of the 21st Century 62044, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    3. Pham, Long & Teich, Jeffrey & Wallenius, Hannele & Wallenius, Jyrki, 2015. "Multi-attribute online reverse auctions: Recent research trends," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 1-9.
    4. Qian, Cheng & Anderson, Edward, 2020. "Buyer’s optimal information revelation strategy in procurement auctions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(3), pages 1011-1025.
    5. Riccardo Camboni Marchi Adani, 2018. "Procuring price and quality using scoring auctions: where do we stand?," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 45(1), pages 17-36, March.
    6. Yili Hong & Chong (Alex) Wang & Paul A. Pavlou, 2016. "Comparing Open and Sealed Bid Auctions: Evidence from Online Labor Markets," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 49-69, March.
    7. Stoll, Sebastian & Zöttl, Gregor, 2012. "Information Disclosure in Open Non-Binding Procurement Auctions: an Empirical Study," Discussion Papers in Economics 13112, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    8. He, Chusu & Milne, Alistair & Ataullah, Ali, 2023. "What explains delays in public procurement decisions?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    9. Jason Allen & Robert Clark & Brent Hickman & Eric Richert, 2019. "Resolving Failed Banks: Uncertainty, Multiple Bidding & Auction Design," Staff Working Papers 19-30, Bank of Canada.
    10. Hatsumi, Kentaro & Ishii, Rieko, 2022. "The effect of price on the quality of public construction in Japan," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    11. Barbosa, Klenio & Boyer, Pierre C., 2021. "Discrimination in Dynamic Procurement Design with Learning-by-doing," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    12. Alibeiki, Hedayat & Gümüş, Mehmet, 2020. "Supply competition under quality scores: Motivations, information sharing and credibility," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    13. Takahashi, Hidenori, 2015. "Strategic design under uncertain evaluations : structural analysis of design-build auctions," Working Papers 15-08, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.
    14. Alok Gupta & Stephen Parente & Pallab Sanyal, 2012. "Competitive bidding for health insurance contracts: lessons from the online HMO auctions," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 303-322, December.
    15. John Asker & Estelle Cantillon, 2010. "Procurement when price and quality matter," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(1), pages 1-34, March.
    16. 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.
    17. Nicola Doni & Domenico Menicucci, 2014. "Information Revelation in Procurement Auctions with Two‐Sided Asymmetric Information," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 952-968, December.
    18. Ari Hyytinen & Sofia Lundberg & Otto Toivanen, 2018. "Design of public procurement auctions: evidence from cleaning contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 49(2), pages 398-426, June.
    19. Huang, Yangguang & Xia, Jijun, 2019. "Procurement auctions under quality manipulation corruption," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 380-399.
    20. Zhixi Wan & Damian R. Beil & Elena Katok, 2012. "When Does It Pay to Delay Supplier Qualification? Theory and Experiments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(11), pages 2057-2075, November.

    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:ormsom:v:16:y:2014:i:3:p:346-364. 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.