IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/oropre/v60y2012i6p1436-1450.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coordination of Outsourced Operations at a Third-Party Facility Subject to Booking, Overtime, and Tardiness Costs

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaoqiang Cai

    (Department of Systems Engineering and Engineering Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong)

  • George L. Vairaktarakis

    (Department of Operations, Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio 44106)

Abstract

We consider an outsourcing problem where a group of manufacturers outsource jobs to a single third party who owns a specialized facility needed to process these jobs. The third party announces the time slots available on her facility, and the associated prices. Manufacturers reserve, on a first-come-first-book basis, time slots that they desire to utilize. Booking of overtime is possible, at a higher cost. A job completed after its due date incurs a tardiness cost. Each manufacturer books chunks of facility time and sequences his jobs over the time slots booked to minimize his booking, overtime, and tardiness costs. This model captures the main features of outsourcing operations in industries such as semiconductor manufacturing, biotechnology, and drug R&D. In current practice, the third party executes all outsourced jobs without performing optimization and coordination. We investigate the issue of the third party serving as a coordinator to create a win--win solution for all. We propose a model based on a cooperative game as follows: (i) Upon receiving the booking requests from the manufacturers, the third party derives an optimal solution if manufacturers cooperate, and computes the savings achieved. (ii) She devises a savings sharing scheme so that, in monetary terms, every manufacturer is better off to coordinate than to act independently or coalesce with a subgroup of manufacturers. (iii) For her work, the third party withholds a portion (rho) of the booking revenue paid by the manufacturers for time slots that are released after coordination. We further design a truth-telling mechanism that can prevent any self-interested manufacturer from purposely reporting false job data to take advantage of the coordination scheme. Finally, we perform a computational experiment to assess the value of coordination to the various parties involved.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaoqiang Cai & George L. Vairaktarakis, 2012. "Coordination of Outsourced Operations at a Third-Party Facility Subject to Booking, Overtime, and Tardiness Costs," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1436-1450, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:60:y:2012:i:6:p:1436-1450
    DOI: 10.1287/opre.1120.1110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.1120.1110
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/opre.1120.1110?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. Green, Jerry & Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 1977. "Characterization of Satisfactory Mechanisms for the Revelation of Preferences for Public Goods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(2), pages 427-438, March.
    2. Hamers, H.J.M. & Borm, P.E.M. & Tijs, S.H., 1993. "On games corresponding to sequencing situations with ready times," Other publications TiSEM 8e2af556-5430-4f98-9334-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Borm, Peter & Fiestras-Janeiro, Gloria & Hamers, Herbert & Sanchez, Estela & Voorneveld, Mark, 2002. "On the convexity of games corresponding to sequencing situations with due dates," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(3), pages 616-634, February.
    4. Calleja, P. & Estevez Fernandez, M.A. & Borm, P.E.M. & Hamers, H.J.M., 2004. "Job Scheduling, Cooperation and Control," Discussion Paper 2004-65, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    5. Herbert Hamers & Flip Klijn & Bas Velzen, 2005. "On the Convexity of Precedence Sequencing Games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 161-175, July.
    6. Nicholas G. Hall & Zhixin Liu, 2010. "Capacity Allocation and Scheduling in Supply Chains," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1711-1725, December.
    7. Tolga Aydinliyim & George L. Vairaktarakis, 2010. "Coordination of Outsourced Operations to Minimize Weighted Flow Time and Capacity Booking Costs," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 236-255, January.
    8. Allesandro Agnetis & Pitu B. Mirchandani & Dario Pacciarelli & Andrea Pacifici, 2004. "Scheduling Problems with Two Competing Agents," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 229-242, April.
    9. Robert McNaughton, 1959. "Scheduling with Deadlines and Loss Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 1-12, October.
    10. Edward Clarke, 1971. "Multipart pricing of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 17-33, September.
    11. Green, Jerry & Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 1977. "On the revelation of preferences for public goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 79-93, August.
    12. Wedad J. Elmaghraby, 2000. "Supply Contract Competition and Sourcing Policies," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 2(4), pages 350-371, April.
    13. Joseph Y.-T. Leung & Michael Pinedo & Guohua Wan, 2010. "Competitive Two-Agent Scheduling and Its Applications," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(2), pages 458-469, April.
    14. Groves, Theodore, 1973. "Incentives in Teams," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 617-631, July.
    15. Theodore Groves & Martin Loeb, 1979. "Incentives in a Divisionalized Firm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 221-230, March.
    16. Yossi Bukchin & Eran Hanany, 2007. "Decentralization Cost in Scheduling: A Game-Theoretic Approach," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 263-275, October.
    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. Agnetis, Alessandro & Aloulou, Mohamed Ali & Fu, Liang-Liang, 2014. "Coordination of production and interstage batch delivery with outsourced distribution," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(1), pages 130-142.
    2. Liu, Zhixin & Lu, Liang & Qi, Xiangtong, 2018. "Cost allocation in rescheduling with machine unavailable period," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 266(1), pages 16-28.
    3. George L. Vairaktarakis, 2013. "Noncooperative Games for Subcontracting Operations," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 148-158, September.
    4. Agnetis, Alessandro & Aloulou, Mohamed Ali & Fu, Liang-Liang, 2016. "Production and interplant batch delivery scheduling: Dominance and cooperation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 38-49.
    5. Slikker, Marco, 2023. "The stable gain splitting rule for sequencing situations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 310(2), pages 902-913.
    6. Chen, Jian & Huang, George Q. & Wang, Jun-Qiang & Yang, Chen, 2019. "A cooperative approach to service booking and scheduling in cloud manufacturing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 861-873.
    7. Lindong Liu & Xiangtong Qi & Zhou Xu, 2016. "Computing Near-Optimal Stable Cost Allocations for Cooperative Games by Lagrangian Relaxation," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 687-702, November.
    8. Gu, Wei & Yu, Xiaoru & Zhang, Shichen & Yan, Xiangbin & Wang, Chen, 2023. "To outsource or not: Bike-share rebalancing strategies under the service quality deviation of a third party," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 310(2), pages 847-859.
    9. Herbert Hamers & Flip Klijn & Marco Slikker, 2013. "Price of Anarchy in Sequencing Situations and the Impossibility to Coordinate," Working Papers 709, Barcelona School of Economics.
    10. Antonio J. Conejo & Nicholas G. Hall & Daniel Zhuoyu Long & Runhao Zhang, 2021. "Robust Capacity Planning for Project Management," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1533-1550, October.

    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. Feldmann, Martin & Müller, Stephanie, 2003. "An incentive scheme for true information providing in Supply Chains," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 63-73, April.
    2. Alexis H. Kunz & Thomas Pfeiffer, 1999. "Investitionsbudgetierung und implizite Verträge: Wie resistent ist der Groves-Mechanismus bei dynamischer Interaktion?," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 203-223, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Hiroki Saitoh & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2008. "Vickrey allocation rule with income effect," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 35(2), pages 391-401, May.
    5. Takashi Kunimoto & Cuiling Zhang, 2021. "On incentive compatible, individually rational public good provision mechanisms," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(2), pages 431-468, August.
    6. Louis Makowski & Joseph M. Ostroy, 1988. "Groves Mechanisms in Continuum Economies: Characterization and Existence," UCLA Economics Working Papers 518, UCLA Department of Economics.
    7. John O. Ledyard, 1978. "The Allocation of Public Goods with Sealed-Bid Auctions: Some Preliminary Evaluations," Discussion Papers 336, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    8. Clark Robinson & Gerry Suchanek, 1985. "On the design of optimal mechanisms for the Arrow-Hahn-McKenzie economy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 313-335, January.
    9. Gerichhausen, M. & Hamers, H.J.M., 2007. "Partitioning Sequencing Situations and Games," Other publications TiSEM 2bddbf5c-c56d-4b10-ba47-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Tommy Andersson & Lars Ehlers & Lars-Gunnar Svensson & Ryan Tierney, 2022. "Gale’s Fixed Tax for Exchanging Houses," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 47(4), pages 3110-3128, November.
    11. Chee W. Chow & Mark K. Hirst & Michael D. Shields, 1994. "Motivating Truthful Subordinate Reporting: An Experimental Investigation in a Two†Subordinate Context," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(2), pages 699-720, March.
    12. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Parag A. Pathak & Alvin E. Roth & Tayfun Sönmez, 2006. "Changing the Boston School Choice Mechanism," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 639, Boston College Department of Economics.
    13. Ledyard, John O., "undated". "Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research," Working Papers 861, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    14. Rica Gonen & Anat Lerner, 2013. "The Incompatibility of Pareto Optimality and Dominant-Strategy Incentive Compatibility in Sufficiently-Anonymous Budget-Constrained Quasilinear Settings," Games, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-21, November.
    15. Martin Hellwig, 2015. "Financial Stability and Monetary Policy," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2015_10, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    16. Chow, Chee W. & Hwang, Richard Nen-Chen & Liao, Woody & Wu, Anne, 1998. "National culture and subordinates' upward communication of private information," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 293-311.
    17. Perrin Lefebvre & David Martimort, 2022. "Delegation, capture and endogenous information structures," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 34(3), pages 357-414, July.
    18. Duygu Yengin, 2017. "No-envy and egalitarian-equivalence under multi-object-demand for heterogeneous objects," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 81-108, January.
    19. Ilan Nehama, 2019. "Almost Quasi-linear Utilities in Disguise: Positive-representation An Extension of Roberts' Theorem," Papers 1910.12131, arXiv.org.
    20. Holzman, Ron & Monderer, Dov, 2004. "Characterization of ex post equilibrium in the VCG combinatorial auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 87-103, April.

    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:oropre:v:60:y:2012:i:6:p:1436-1450. 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.