Do Auction Parameters Affect Buyer Surplus in E‐Auctions for Procurement?

Although the initial euphoria about Internet‐enabled reverse auctions has given way to a cautious but widespread use of reverse auctions in business‐to‐business (B2B) procurement, there is a limited understanding of the effect of auction design parameters on buyer surplus. In this paper, we study the effect of bidding competition, information asymmetry, reserve price, bid decrement, auction duration, and bidder type on buyer surplus. We collected field data on more than 700 online procurement auctions conducted by a leading auctioneer and involving procurement items worth millions of dollars. Consistent with the predictions of auction theory, the results indicate that bidding competition, reserve price, and information sharing affect buyer surplus. Unlike previous findings in the consumer‐to‐consumer context, we find that bid decrement and auction duration have no effect in B2B procurement auctions. Our results suggest that use of the rank‐bidding format increases buyer surplus when incumbent suppliers participate in the auction. We discuss the theoretical and managerial implications of these findings for future research and for optimal design of online procurement auctions.     

Push or Pull? Auctioning Supply Contracts

Consider a buyer, facing uncertain demand, who sources from multiple suppliers via online procurement auctions (open descending price‐only auctions). The suppliers have heterogeneous production costs, which are private information, and the winning supplier has to invest in production capacity before the demand uncertainty is resolved. The buyer chooses to offer a push or pull contract, for which the single price and winning supplier are determined via the auction. We show that, with a pull contract, the buyer does not necessarily benefit from a larger number of suppliers participating in the auction, due to the negative effect of supplier competition on the incentive of supplier capacity investment. We thus propose an enhanced pull mechanism that mitigates this effect with a floor price. We then analyze and compare the outcomes of auctions for push and (enhanced) pull contracts, establishing when one form is preferred over the other based on the buyer's profits. We also compare our simple, price‐only push and pull contract auctions to the optimal mechanisms, benchmarking the performance of the simple mechanisms as well as establishing the relative importance of auction design and contract design in procurement auctions.     

多部件采购外包的两阶段均衡投标策略

本文考虑一个由单个制造商和多个供应商群体组成的供应链——该制造商需要采购多个部件,对于每个部件在市场上均存在多个供应商。不同于传统的从各供应商群体分别采购各个部件,制造商考虑将所有部件的采购整体外包给某个供应商。在第一阶段,制造商使用一级价格密封投标的逆向拍卖来确定赢得整体采购合约的供应商。接下来,第一阶段投标的获胜者生产其所能供应的部件,并使用逆向拍卖向第一阶段中未获胜的其他竞标者采购其余部件。我们分析了供应商在两个阶段的均衡竞价策略,并比较了制造商在亲自逐件采购和外包整体采购两种情况下的期望采购成本。我们证明了在两种机制下制造商的总的期望采购成本相等。     

An Analysis of Scoring and Buyer‐Determined Procurement Auctions

In procurement auctions, the object for sale is a contract, bidders are suppliers, and the bid taker is a buyer. The suppliers bidding for the contract are usually the current supplier (the incumbent) and a group of potential new suppliers (the entrants). As the buyer has an ongoing relationship with the incumbent, he needs to adjust the bids of the entrants to include non‐price attributes, such as the switching costs. The buyer can run a scoring auction, in which suppliers compete on the adjusted bids or scores, or, he can run a buyer‐determined auction, in which suppliers compete on the price, and the buyer adjusts a certain number of the bids with the non‐price attributes after the auction to determine the winner. Unless the incumbent has a significant cost advantage over the entrants, I find that the scoring auction yields a lower average cost for the buyer, if the non‐price attributes are available. If the non‐price attributes are difficult or expensive to obtain, the buyer could run a buyer‐determined auction adjusting only the lowest price bid.     

An Experimental Investigation of Procurement Auctions with Asymmetric Sellers

Electronic reverse auctions are a commonly used procurement mechanism. Research to date has focused on suppliers who are ex ante symmetric in that their costs are drawn from a common distribution. However, in many cases, a seller's range of potential costs depends on their own operations, location, or economies of scale and scope. Thus, understanding how different bidder types impact auction outcomes is key when designing an auction. This study reports the results of the first controlled laboratory experiment designed to compare prices between first‐price and second‐price procurement auctions for homogeneous goods when seller cost types are asymmetric and the number of bidders varies. The results indicate that first‐price auctions generate lower prices regardless of market composition. The results also reveal that first‐price auctions are at least weakly more efficient than second‐price auctions despite the theoretical prediction that the reverse should hold in asymmetric auctions. Post hoc analysis of individual bidders' behavior in first‐price auctions revealed evidence that bidders systematically underbid when their cost realizations were close to the lower bound. Furthermore, bidders adjust their behavior based on the type of the other bidders in the market in a manner inconsistent with theory. Consequently, adding a third bidder to a two‐bidder market is not advantageous to the buyer unless that third bidder is a low‐cost type.     

Increasing Revenue by Decreasing Information in Procurement Auctions

We report on results of several laboratory experiments that investigate on‐line procurement auctions in which suppliers bid on price, but exogenous bidder quality affects winner determination. In procurement auctions, bidder quality may or may not be publicly known to all bidders, and the effect of this quality transparency on the auction outcome is one aspect of auction design that we examine. The second aspect of auction design that we examine is the effect of price visibility on the auction outcome, and the interaction between price visibility and quality transparency. In terms of price visibility, we consider two extreme cases: the sealed bid request for proposals (RFPs), and the open‐bid dynamic auction event. In terms of bidder quality transparency, we also consider two extreme cases: a setting in which bidder qualities are publicly known and the case in which they are private. We find that in our laboratory experiments, the RFP format is consistent in generating higher buyer surplus levels than does the open‐bid dynamic format. This advantage is independent of the quality transparency. In contrast, the open‐bid format is highly sensitive to quality transparency, generating significantly lower buyer surplus levels when the information about bidder quality is public.     

具有高投标成本的多属性逆向拍卖博弈模型

越来越多像GE这样的大型企业在利用多属性逆向拍卖选择新的供应商采购产品时,通常会设定较高的固定投标成本。针对此情况,建立了三阶段的非合作博弈模型,并利用求解子博弈纳什均衡策略的方法,推导出了供应商的最优投标价格。并得到以下两个主要结论:一是供应商的最优投标策略是按照生产产品真实的质量和交货期进行投标,且投标价格为最优投标价格;二是采购商的最优策略是选择投标价格最高的供应商作为拍卖获胜者,这一违反直觉的结论。这是合理的,因为投标价格最高的供应商也是类型最优的供应商,也即投标质量和投标交货期组合最优的供应商。最后,利用数值实验验证了模型的有效性,并显示出设定相对较高的固定投标成本对采购商来说是有利的。     

On E‐Auctions for Procurement Operations

Electronic auctions have revolutionized procurement in the last decade. In many situations, they have replaced negotiations for supplier selection and price setting. While they have often greatly reduced transaction costs and increased competition, they have also encountered problems and resistance from suppliers resenting their intrusion on cooperative supplier/buyer relationships. In response to these issues, procurement auctions have evolved in radical new directions. Buyers use business rules to limit adverse changes. Some procurement auctions allow bidders to offer variants in the specifications of products to be supplied. Most important, some suppliers are allowing bidders to bid on packages of items, not just individual items. This tends to change procurement auctions from zero‐sum fights over supplier profit margins to win‐win searches for synergies. These changes have opened up many new research areas. Researchers are trying to improve how to deal with the computational issues involved in package auctions and to analyze the new auctions forms that are evolving. In general, equilibrium incentives are not known, and dealing with ties in package auctions is an issue. Computer scientists are analyzing the use of computerized bidding agents. Mechanisms that combine auctions with fixed buy prices or with negotiations need to be analyzed.     

Introduction to the Special Issue on E‐Auctions for Procurement Operations

We present nine papers on e‐auctions for procurement operations. The first of the issue's three sections is a foreword highlighting current trends and future research directions. The second section is composed of three commissioned survey papers, covering auctions within e‐sourcing events, electronic markets for truckload transportation, and games and mechanism design in machine scheduling. The final section consists of five research papers on the following topics: whether auction parameters affect buyer surplus in e‐auctions for procurement, collusion in second‐price auctions under minimax regret, the effect of timing on jump bidding in ascending auctions, market‐based allocation with indivisible bids, and ranked items auctions and online advertisement.     

Split‐Award Procurement Auctions—Can Bayesian Equilibrium Strategies Predict Human Bidding Behavior in Multi‐Object Auctions?

We analyze if and when symmetric Bayes Nash equilibrium predictions can explain human bidding behavior in multi‐object auctions. We focus on two sealed‐bid split‐award auctions with ex ante split decisions as they can be regularly found in procurement practice. These auction formats are straightforward multi‐object extensions of the first‐price sealed‐bid auction. We derive the risk‐neutral symmetric Bayes Nash equilibrium strategies and find that, although the two auction mechanisms yield the same expected costs to the buyer, other aspects of the two models, including the equilibrium bidding strategies, differ significantly. The strategic considerations in these auction formats are more involved than in single‐lot first‐price sealed‐bid auctions, and it is questionable whether expected utility maximization can explain human bidding behavior in such multi‐object auctions. Therefore, we analyzed the predictive accuracy of our equilibrium strategies in the laboratory. In human subject experiments we found underbidding, which is in line with earlier experiments on single‐lot first‐price sealed‐bid auctions. To control for regret, we organize experiments against computerized bidders, who play the equilibrium strategy. In computerized experiments where bid functions are only used in a single auction, we found significant underbidding on low‐cost draws. In experiments where the bid function is reused in 100 auctions, we could also control effectively for risk aversion, and there is no significant difference of the average bidding behavior and the risk‐neutral Bayes Nash equilibrium bid function. The results suggest that strategic complexity does not serve as an explanation for underbidding in split‐award procurement auctions, but risk aversion does have a significant impact.     

ASSESSING SOCIAL COSTS OF INEFFICIENT PROCUREMENT DESIGN

This paper considers the social costs implied by inefficient allocation of contracts in a first‐price, sealed‐bid procurement auction with asymmetric bidders. We adopt a constrained (piecewise linear) strategy equilibrium concept and estimate the structural parameters of the bidders' distribution of costs. We estimate social costs defined as the predicted cost difference between the winning firm and the most efficient bidding firm. We also compare the expected procurement costs under two different auction formats. The data is collected from procurement auctions of road painting in Sweden during 1993–1999. The results indicate that the social costs of inefficient contract allocation is about 2% of total potential production cost and that an efficient second‐price auction would lower the expected procurement cost by 2.5%. (JEL: D44, H57, C15)     

Procurement with Reverse Auction and Flexible Noncompetitive Contracts

This article investigates a hybrid procurement mechanism that combines a reverse auction with flexible noncompetitive contracts. A buyer adopts such mechanism to procure multiple units of a product from a group of potential suppliers. Specifically, the buyer first offers contracts to some suppliers who, if accepting the contract, do not participate in the auction while committing to selling a unit to the buyer at the price of the subsequent auction. For the suppliers rejecting the offers, they can join the subsequent auction with the other suppliers to compete on the remaining units. When the buyer offers only one flexible noncompetitive contract, we find that the selected supplier may accept the offer regardless of whether he knows his exact cost information. Meanwhile, the buyer can benefit from offering such a contract, as opposed to solely conducting a regular reverse auction or offering a noncompetitive contract that does not allow suppliers declining offers to join the subsequent auction. Moreover, we find that the suppliers' information about their own costs has a significant impact on the buyer's decision. When the buyer makes multiple offers, we analyze the resulting game behavior of the selected suppliers and demonstrate that the buyer can benefit more than just offering one such contract. Therefore, the hybrid procurement mechanism can be mutually beneficial for both the buyer and the selected suppliers.     

Efficient Multi‐Attribute Multi‐Unit Auctions for B2B E‐Commerce Logistics

This study is the first proposing allocatively efficient multi‐attribute auctions for the procurement of multiple items. In the B2B e‐commerce logistics problem (ELP), the e‐commerce platform is the shipper generating a large number of online orders between product sellers and buyers, and third‐party logistics (3PL) providers are carriers that can deliver these online orders. This study focuses on the ELP with multiple attributes (ELP‐MA), which is generally the problem of matching the shipper's online orders and 3PL providers given that price and other attributes are jointly evaluated. We develop a one‐sided Vickrey–Clarke–Groves (O‐VCG) auction for the ELP‐MA. The O‐VCG auction leads to incentive compatibility (on the sell side), allocative efficiency, budget balance, and individual rationality. We next introduce the concept of universally unsatisfied set to construct a primal‐dual algorithm, also called the primal‐dual Vickrey (PDV) auction. We prove that the O‐VCG auction can be viewed as a single‐attribute multi‐unit forward Vickrey (SA‐MFV) auction. Both PDV and SA‐MFV auctions realize VCG payments and truthful bidding for general valuations. This result reveals the underlying link not only between single‐attribute and multi‐attribute auctions, but between static and dynamic auctions in a multi‐attribute setting.     

Reputation and Mechanism Choice in Procurement Auctions: An Experiment

We experimentally study the role of reputation in procurement using two common mechanisms: price‐based and buyer‐determined auctions. While buyers are bound to buy from the lowest bidder in price‐based auctions, they can choose between bidders in buyer‐determined auctions. Only the latter buyers can consider the reputation of bidders. We find that bidders supply higher quality in buyer‐determined auctions leading to higher market efficiencies in these auctions. Accordingly, buyers prefer the buyer‐determined auction over the price‐based auction, while only half of the bidders do so. A more detailed analysis of buyers' and bidders' behavior and profits provides insights into their mechanism choice.     

Speculation in Standard Auctions with Resale

In standard auctions resale creates a role for a speculator—a bidder who is commonly known to have no use value for the good on sale. We study this issue in environments with symmetric independent private‐value bidders. For second‐price and English auctions the efficient value‐bidding equilibrium coexists with a continuum of inefficient equilibria in which the speculator wins the auction and makes positive profits. First‐price and Dutch auctions have an essentially unique equilibrium, and whether or not the speculator wins the auction and distorts the final allocation depends on the number of bidders, the value distribution, and the discount factor. Speculators do not make profits in first‐price or Dutch auctions.     

Design of Auction Parameters to Reduce the Effect of Collusion

Government departments are increasingly turning to auctions to procure goods and services. Collusion among bidders, however, reduces competition and raises winning bid prices. Since conventional collusion control measures based on the redesign of auction mechanisms are less effective in government procurement auctions, there is a need to devise control measures that decrease the effect of collusion. This article demonstrates how the principles of design of experiments can be applied in a system dynamics model to find the auction parameter values that substantially reduce the effect of collusion in government procurement auctions. This research makes a number of contributions. First, it develops a feedback‐based dynamic mechanism of collusion in government procurement auctions. The mechanism proposes the winning bid price as being determined not by the total number of bidders but by the number of independent bidders. It defines each cartel as one independent bidder regardless of the number of bidders in the cartel. Second, the mechanism is tested by developing a system dynamics model to government auctions for procuring contracts for roadwork projects in India. Third, the principles of experimental design are applied to find the auction parameter values that ensure high bid participation and low winning price‐to‐reserve price ratios.     

网上拍卖销售与逆向拍卖采购下的库存管理

以电子商务为背景研究网上拍卖销售与逆向拍卖采购下的库存管理。在该问题中,零售商一方面利用网上拍卖销售产品,另一方面利用逆向拍卖进行采购。对于单阶段情形,证明网上拍卖下零售商的期望收益函数是采购量的严格递增的凹函数,从而得到零售商的最优采购策略和供应商的最优投标策略。对于多阶段情形,利用马尔可夫决策过程理论建立该问题的最优控制模型,得到零售商的最优采购策略和供应商的贝叶斯-纳什均衡投标策略均与基本库存策略相类似。     

Does a Supplier's Operational Competence Translate into Financial Performance? An Empirical Analysis of Supplier–Customer Relationships

We conduct an empirical investigation of how a supplier's operational competence, as reflected by outcomes in the areas of quality, cost, delivery, flexibility, and new product development, translates into financial gains from a key customer. In contrast to previous research directed at the firm level, this study focuses on the supplier–customer relationship level. Using survey data from 158 suppliers in the manufacturing industry, we perform structural equation modeling to map out the paths from operational competence to financial performance—via dependencies and cooperative behaviors between suppliers and their customers. This study is the first scholarly attempt to examine the link between suppliers’ operational competencies and financial performance in interorganizational relationships. It is also an early investigation into operational competence as a source of bi‐lateral dependence. Our findings show that the supplier's operational competences increase its customer's dependence by enhancing the value of its products/services. However, the resulting increase in the supplier's power is not leveraged to shape relationship behaviors or capture value from its customer. In contrast, the customer's existing power as a major buyer plays an important role in shaping cooperative behaviors and affecting the supplier's financial performance from the customer relationship.     

基于Cobb-Douglas效用函数的多属性采购拍卖

在多属性采购拍卖的实践中,利润和赢得合同对供给者来说具有不同的重要性.假设供给者使用Cobb-Douglas效用函数对利润和赢得合同的重要性程度进行权衡,在第一评分拍卖及第二评分拍卖下获得了供给者的均衡投标策略和采购者的期望效用,并对采购者的期望效用进行了比较.结果表明供给者对被采购物品的质量选择只与自己的成本参数和打分函数有关;当供给者越看重获取采购合同,采购者的期望效用越高;当采购者只能使用效用函数打分时,如果供给者更看重利润,采购者应该采用第二评分拍卖节约采购成本,否则使用第一评分拍卖.     

Role of Random Capacity Risk and the Retailer in Decentralized Supply Chains with Competing Suppliers

This research considers a supply chain under the following conditions: (i) two heterogeneous suppliers are in competition, (ii) supply capacity is random and pricing is endogenous, (iii) consumer demand, with and without an intermediate retailer, is price dependent. Specifically, we examine how uncertainty in supply capacity affects optimal ordering and pricing decisions, supplier and retailer profits, and the incentives to reduce such uncertainty. When two suppliers sell through a monopolistic retailer, supply uncertainty not only affects the retailer's diversification strategy for replenishment, but also changes the suppliers’ wholesale price competition and the incentive for reducing capacity uncertainty. In this dual‐sourcing model, we show that the benefit of reducing capacity uncertainty depends on the cost heterogeneity between the suppliers. In addition, we show that a supplier does not necessarily benefit from capacity variability reduction. We contrast this incentive misalignment with findings from the single‐supplier case and a supplier‐duopoly case where both suppliers sell directly to market without the monopolistic retailer. In the latter single‐supplier and duopoly cases, we prove that the unreliable supplier always benefits from reducing capacity variability. These results highlight the role of the retailer's diversification strategy in distorting a supplier's incentive for reducing capacity uncertainty under supplier price competition.