[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v57y2011i4p689-704.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contract Complexity and Performance Under Asymmetric Demand Information: An Experimental Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Basak Kalkanci

    (Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305)

  • Kay-Yut Chen

    (HP Laboratories, Hewlett-Packard Company, Palo Alto, California 94304)

  • Feryal Erhun

    (Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305)

Abstract
Exploring the tension between theory and practice regarding complexity and performance in contract design is especially relevant. The goal of this paper is to understand why simpler contracts may commonly be preferred in practice despite being theoretically suboptimal. We study a two-tier supply chain with a single supplier and a single buyer to characterize the impact of contract complexity and asymmetric information on performance and to compare theoretical predictions to actual behavior in human subject experiments. In the experiments, the computerized buyer faces a newsvendor setting and has better information on end-consumer demand than the human supplier. The supplier offers either a quantity discount contract (with two or three price blocks) or a price-only contract, contracts that are commonplace in practice, yet different in complexity. Results show that, contrary to theoretical predictions, quantity discounts do not necessarily increase the supplier's profits. We also observe a more equitable distribution of profits between the supplier and the buyer than what theory predicts. These observations can be described with three decision biases (the probabilistic choice bias, the reinforcement bias, and the memory bias) and can be modeled using the experience-weighted attraction learning model. Our results demonstrate that simpler contracts, such as a price-only contract or a quantity discount contract with a low number of price blocks, are sufficient for a supplier designing contracts under asymmetric demand information. This paper was accepted by Christian Terwiesch, operations and supply chain management.

Suggested Citation

  • Basak Kalkanci & Kay-Yut Chen & Feryal Erhun, 2011. "Contract Complexity and Performance Under Asymmetric Demand Information: An Experimental Evaluation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(4), pages 689-704, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:57:y:2011:i:4:p:689-704
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1110.1318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1318
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1318?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. Elena Katok & Diana Yan Wu, 2009. "Contracting in Supply Chains: A Laboratory Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1953-1968, December.
    2. AJ A. Bostian & Charles A. Holt & Angela M. Smith, 2008. "Newsvendor "Pull-to-Center" Effect: Adaptive Learning in a Laboratory Experiment," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 590-608, July.
    3. McKelvey Richard D. & Palfrey Thomas R., 1995. "Quantal Response Equilibria for Normal Form Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 6-38, July.
    4. Noah Lim & Teck-Hua Ho, 2007. "Designing Price Contracts for Boundedly Rational Customers: Does the Number of Blocks Matter?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 312-326, 05-06.
    5. Colin Camerer & Teck-Hua Ho, 1999. "Experience-weighted Attraction Learning in Normal Form Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 827-874, July.
    6. Chu, Leon Yang & Sappington, David E.M., 2007. "A note on optimal procurement contracts with limited direct cost inflation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 745-753, November.
    7. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    8. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    9. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1987. "Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 303-328, March.
    10. Xuanming Su, 2008. "Bounded Rationality in Newsvendor Models," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 566-589, May.
    11. Hau L. Lee & V. Padmanabhan & Seungjin Whang, 1997. "Information Distortion in a Supply Chain: The Bullwhip Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 546-558, April.
    12. Tony Haitao Cui & Jagmohan S. Raju & Z. John Zhang, 2007. "Fairness and Channel Coordination," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(8), pages 1303-1314, August.
    13. Simon, Herbert A, 1979. "Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(4), pages 493-513, September.
    14. DeShazo, J. R. & Fermo, German, 2002. "Designing Choice Sets for Stated Preference Methods: The Effects of Complexity on Choice Consistency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 123-143, July.
    15. Abel P. Jeuland & Steven M. Shugan, 1983. "Managing Channel Profits," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 239-272.
    16. Philip Armour & Mary C. Daly, 2008. "Retirement savings and decision errors: lessons from behavioral economics," FRBSF Economic Letter, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue jun6.
    17. Gary E. Bolton & Elena Katok, 2008. "Learning by Doing in the Newsvendor Problem: A Laboratory Investigation of the Role of Experience and Feedback," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 519-538, September.
    18. de Palma, Andre & Myers, Gordon M & Papageorgiou, Yorgos Y, 1994. "Rational Choice under an Imperfect Ability to Choose," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 419-440, June.
    19. Heiner, Ronald A, 1983. "The Origin of Predictable Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 560-595, September.
    20. Fangruo Chen & Awi Federgruen & Yu-Sheng Zheng, 2001. "Coordination Mechanisms for a Distribution System with One Supplier and Multiple Retailers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 693-708, May.
    21. Houyuan Jiang & Serguei Netessine & Sergei Savin, 2011. "TECHNICAL NOTE---Robust Newsvendor Competition Under Asymmetric Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 254-261, February.
    22. Z. Kevin Weng, 1995. "Channel Coordination and Quantity Discounts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(9), pages 1509-1522, September.
    23. Teck-Hua Ho & Juanjuan Zhang, 2008. "Designing Pricing Contracts for Boundedly Rational Customers: Does the Framing of the Fixed Fee Matter?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 686-700, April.
    24. Benton, W. C. & Park, Seungwook, 1996. "A classification of literature on determining the lot size under quantity discounts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(2), pages 219-238, July.
    25. Charles J. Corbett & Xavier de Groote, 2000. "A Supplier's Optimal Quantity Discount Policy Under Asymmetric Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(3), pages 444-450, March.
    26. Nihat Altintas & Feryal Erhun & Sridhar Tayur, 2008. "Quantity Discounts Under Demand Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 777-792, April.
    27. Özalp Özer & Yanchong Zheng & Kay-Yut Chen, 2011. "Trust in Forecast Information Sharing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1111-1137, June.
    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. Özalp Özer & Yanchong Zheng & Yufei Ren, 2014. "Trust, Trustworthiness, and Information Sharing in Supply Chains Bridging China and the United States," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(10), pages 2435-2460, October.
    2. Yinghao Zhang & Karen Donohue & Tony Haitao Cui, 2016. "Contract Preferences and Performance for the Loss-Averse Supplier: Buyback vs. Revenue Sharing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1734-1754, June.
    3. Tony Haitao Cui & Guangwen Kong & Behrooz Pourghannad, 2020. "Is Simplicity the Ultimate Sophistication? The Superiority of Linear Pricing," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(7), pages 1767-1788, July.
    4. Karen Donohue & Özalp Özer, 2020. "Behavioral Operations: Past, Present, and Future," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 191-202, January.
    5. Roemer, Nils & Müller, Sven & Voigt, Guido, 2023. "A choice-based optimization approach for contracting in supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(1), pages 271-286.
    6. Teck-Hua Ho & Noah Lim & Tony Haitao Cui, 2010. "Reference Dependence in Multilocation Newsvendor Models: A Structural Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(11), pages 1891-1910, November.
    7. Özalp Özer & Yanchong Zheng & Kay-Yut Chen, 2011. "Trust in Forecast Information Sharing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1111-1137, June.
    8. Becker-Peth, Michael & Thonemann, Ulrich W., 2016. "Reference points in revenue sharing contracts—How to design optimal supply chain contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1033-1049.
    9. Shan Li & Kay-Yut Chen & Ying Rong, 2020. "The Behavioral Promise and Pitfalls in Compensating Store Managers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(10), pages 4899-4919, October.
    10. Abdolkarim Sadrieh & Guido Voigt, 2017. "Strategic risk in supply chain contract design," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 87(1), pages 125-153, January.
    11. Shan Li & Kay‐Yut Chen, 2020. "The Commitment Conundrum of Inventory Sharing," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(2), pages 353-370, February.
    12. Nihat Altintas & Feryal Erhun & Sridhar Tayur, 2008. "Quantity Discounts Under Demand Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 777-792, April.
    13. Wu, Diana Yan, 2013. "The impact of repeated interactions on supply chain contracts: A laboratory study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 3-15.
    14. Yefen Chen & Xuanming Su & Xiaobo Zhao, 2012. "Modeling Bounded Rationality in Capacity Allocation Games with the Quantal Response Equilibrium," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(10), pages 1952-1962, October.
    15. Tingliang Huang & Gad Allon & Achal Bassamboo, 2013. "Bounded Rationality in Service Systems," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 263-279, May.
    16. Kay-Yut Chen & Jingguo Wang & Yan Lang, 2022. "Coping with Digital Extortion: An Experimental Study of Benefit Appeals and Normative Appeals," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 5269-5286, July.
    17. Li, Zhong-Ping & Wang, Jian-Jun & Perera, Sandun & Shi, Jim (Junmin), 2022. "Coordination of a supply chain with Nash bargaining fairness concerns," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    18. Tony Haitao Cui & Yinghao Zhang, 2018. "Cognitive Hierarchy in Capacity Allocation Games," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1250-1270, March.
    19. Jordan Tong & Daniel Feiler, 2017. "A Behavioral Model of Forecasting: Naive Statistics on Mental Samples," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3609-3627, November.
    20. Meng Li & Nicholas C. Petruzzi & Jun Zhang, 2017. "Overconfident Competing Newsvendors," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(8), pages 2637-2646, August.

    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:57:y:2011:i:4:p:689-704. 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.