IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_6985.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Buyer Uncertainty about Seller Capacity: Causes, Consequences, and a Partial Solution

Author

Listed:
  • John Horton

Abstract

Employers in an online labor market often pursue workers with little capacity to take on more work. The pursuit of low-capacity workers is consequential, as these workers are more likely to reject employer inquires, causing a reduction in the probability a job opening is ultimately filled. In an attempt to shift more employer attention to workers with greater capacity, the market-designing platform introduced a new signaling feature into the market. It was effective, in that when a worker signaled having high capacity, he or she received more invitations from employers, rejected a smaller fraction of those invitations, quoted a lower price to do the work, and was more likely to be hired. A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests the signaling feature alone could increase market surplus by as much as 6%, both by increasing the number of matches formed and by helping to allocate projects to workers with lower costs.

Suggested Citation

  • John Horton, 2018. "Buyer Uncertainty about Seller Capacity: Causes, Consequences, and a Partial Solution," CESifo Working Paper Series 6985, CESifo.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_6985
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp6985.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bajari, Patrick & Tadelis, Steven, 2001. "Incentives versus Transaction Costs: A Theory of Procurement Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(3), pages 387-407, Autumn.
    2. Hanna Halaburda & Mikolaj Jan Piskorski, 2010. "When Should a Platform Give People Fewer Choices and Charge More for Them?," Antitrust Chronicle, Competition Policy International, vol. 7.
    3. Ramon Casadesus‐Masanell & Hanna Hałaburda, 2014. "When Does a Platform Create Value by Limiting Choice?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 259-293, June.
    4. Paul Resnick & Richard Zeckhauser & John Swanson & Kate Lockwood, 2006. "The value of reputation on eBay: A controlled experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 79-101, June.
    5. Gad Allon & Achal Bassamboo & Eren B. Çil, 2012. "Large-Scale Service Marketplaces: The Role of the Moderating Firm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(10), pages 1854-1872, October.
    6. Apostolos Filippas & John J. Horton & Joseph M. Golden, 2019. "Reputation Inflation," NBER Working Papers 25857, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Christopher T. Stanton & Catherine Thomas, 2016. "Landing the First Job: The Value of Intermediaries in Online Hiring," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 83(2), pages 810-854.
    8. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 990-1029, June.
    9. Ajay Agrawal & John Horton & Nicola Lacetera & Elizabeth Lyons, 2015. "Digitization and the Contract Labor Market: A Research Agenda," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Analysis of the Digital Economy, pages 219-250, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Geoffrey G. Parker & Marshall W. Van Alstyne, 2005. "Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(10), pages 1494-1504, October.
    11. 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.
    12. Hema Yoganarasimhan, 2013. "The Value of Reputation in an Online Freelance Marketplace," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 860-891, November.
    13. Steven Tadelis & Florian Zettelmeyer, 2015. "Information Disclosure as a Matching Mechanism: Theory and Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(2), pages 886-905, February.
    14. Jonathan V. Hall & Alan B. Krueger, 2015. "An Analysis of the Labor Market for Uber's Driver-Partners in the United States," Working Papers 587, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    15. John J. Horton, 2017. "The Effects of Algorithmic Labor Market Recommendations: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(2), pages 345-385.
    16. Mark Armstrong Author-Email: mark.armstrong@ucl.ac.uk Author-Workplace-Name: University College of London, 2006. "Competition in Two-Sided Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, Autumn.
    17. Agrawal, Ajay & Lacetera, Nicola & Lyons, Elizabeth, 2016. "Does standardized information in online markets disproportionately benefit job applicants from less developed countries?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 1-12.
    18. Amanda Pallais, 2014. "Inefficient Hiring in Entry-Level Labor Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(11), pages 3565-3599, November.
    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. Alan Benson & Aaron Sojourner & Akhmed Umyarov, 2020. "Can Reputation Discipline the Gig Economy? Experimental Evidence from an Online Labor Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(5), pages 1802-1825, May.
    2. Nikhil Vellodi, 2018. "Ratings Design and Barriers to Entry," Working Papers 18-13, NET Institute.
    3. Jun Li & Serguei Netessine, 2020. "Higher Market Thickness Reduces Matching Rate in Online Platforms: Evidence from a Quasiexperiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 271-289, January.

    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. John J. Horton, 2019. "Buyer Uncertainty About Seller Capacity: Causes, Consequences, and a Partial Solution," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(8), pages 3518-3540, August.
    2. Cristiano Codagnone & Fabienne Abadie & Federico Biagi, 2016. "The Future of Work in the ‘Sharing Economy’. Market Efficiency and Equitable Opportunities or Unfair Precarisation?," JRC Research Reports JRC101280, Joint Research Centre.
    3. Zhijuan Hong & Ruhai Wu & Yan Sun & Kunxiang Dong, 2020. "Buyer preferences for auction pricing rules in online outsourcing markets: fixed price vs. open price," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(1), pages 163-179, March.
    4. Moshe A. Barach & Joseph M. Golden & John J. Horton, 2020. "Steering in Online Markets: The Role of Platform Incentives and Credibility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 4047-4070, September.
    5. Panos Constantinides & Ola Henfridsson & Geoffrey G. Parker, 2018. "Introduction—Platforms and Infrastructures in the Digital Age," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 381-400, June.
    6. Maier, Michael F. & Viete, Steffen & Ody, Margard, 2017. "Plattformbasierte Erwerbsarbeit: Stand der empirischen Forschung," IZA Research Reports 81, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Laurel Wheeler & Robert Garlick & Eric Johnson & Patrick Shaw & Marissa Gargano, 2022. "LinkedIn(to) Job Opportunities: Experimental Evidence from Job Readiness Training," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(2), pages 101-125, April.
    8. Chen Liang & Yili Hong & Bin Gu, 2016. "Effects of IT-enabled Monitoring on Labor Contracting in Online Platforms: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Working Papers 16-01, NET Institute.
    9. Jason Chan & Jing Wang, 2018. "Hiring Preferences in Online Labor Markets: Evidence of a Female Hiring Bias," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(7), pages 2973-2994, July.
    10. Cristiano Codagnone & Federico Biagi & Fabienne Abadie, 2016. "The Passions and the Interests: Unpacking the ‘Sharing Economy’," JRC Research Reports JRC101279, Joint Research Centre.
    11. Braesemann, Fabian & Stephany, Fabian & Teutloff, Ole & Kässi, Otto & Graham, Mark & Lehdonvirta, Vili, 2021. "The polarisation of remote work," SocArXiv q8a96, Center for Open Science.
    12. Kazakova, E. & Sandomirskaia, M. & Suvorov, A. & Khazhgerieva, A. & Shavshin, R., 2023. "Platforms, online labor markets, and crowdsourcing. Part 1. Traditional online labor market," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 120-148.
    13. Moshe A. Barach & Joseph M. Golden & John J. Horton, 2019. "Steering in Online Markets: The Role of Platform Incentives and Credibility," NBER Working Papers 25917, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. 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.
    15. Irfan Kanat & Yili Hong & T. S. Raghu, 2018. "Surviving in Global Online Labor Markets for IT Services: A Geo-Economic Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 893-909, December.
    16. Marios Kokkodis & Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis, 2016. "Reputation Transferability in Online Labor Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1687-1706, June.
    17. Feng Zhu & Qihong Liu, 2018. "Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2618-2642, October.
    18. T. Tony Ke & Yuting Zhu, 2021. "Cheap Talk on Freelance Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5901-5920, September.
    19. Satish Nambisan & Shaker A. Zahra & Yadong Luo, 2019. "Global platforms and ecosystems: Implications for international business theories," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(9), pages 1464-1486, December.
    20. Evangelos Mourelatos & Jaakko Simonen & Simo Hosio & Daniil Likhobaba & Dmitry Ustalov, 2024. "How has the COVID-19 pandemic shaped behavior in crowdsourcing? The role of online labor market training," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 94(9), pages 1201-1244, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    labor economics; market design; digitization;
    All these keywords.

    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:ces:ceswps:_6985. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.