A Supplier’s Optimal Quantity Discount Policy Under Asymmetric Information Charles J. Corbett Xavier de Groote Presented by Jing Zhou.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Designing Supply Contracts: Contract Type and Information Asymmetry Authors: C. Corbett, C. S. Tang Presenter: T.J. Hu.
Advertisements

Second degree price discrimination
Intra-Industry Trade, Imperfect Competition, Trade Integration and Invasive Species Risk Anh T. Tu and John Beghin Iowa State University.
Chapter 37 Asymmetric Information In reality, it is often the case that one of the transacting party has less information than the other. Consider a market.
Bank Competition and Financial Stability: A General Equilibrium Expositi on Gianni De Nicolò International Monetary Fund and CESifo Marcella Lucchetta.
Government Policy and Market Failures
Lecture 5 Decision Analysis Chapter 14.
1 Regret-based Incremental Partial Revelation Mechanism Design Nathanaël Hyafil, Craig Boutilier AAAI 2006 Department of Computer Science University of.
Q. 9 – 3 D G A C E Start Finish B F.
Inventory Control IME 451, Lecture 3.
DECISION MARKETS WITH GOOD INCENTIVES Yiling Chen (Harvard), Ian Kash (Harvard), Internet and Network Economics, 2011.
Imperfect commitment Santiago Truffa. Agenda 1.“Authority and communication in Organizations” Wouter Dessein, RES “Contracting for information.
1. problem set 12 from Binmore’s Fun and Games. p.564 Ex. 41 p.565 Ex. 42.
Bundling Equilibrium in Combinatorial Auctions Written by: Presented by: Ron Holzman Rica Gonen Noa Kfir-Dahav Dov Monderer Moshe Tennenholtz.
Adverse Selection Asymmetric information is feature of many markets
Chapter 2 The Base Model Stefan P. Schleicher University of Graz Economics of Information Incentives and Contracts.
Recruitment and effort of teachers The principal-agent problem Kjell G. Salvanes.
Chapter 16 Negotiation 1.Costly Agreements 2.Ultimatum game with Incomplete Information 3.Counteroffers with Incomplete Information 4.The revelation principle.
1 Chapter 10- Order Quantities IM417 Manufacturing Resources Analysis Southeast Missouri State University Compiled by Bart Weihl Spring 2001.
Job Market Signaling (Spence model)
Sequences of Take-It-or-Leave-it Offers: Near-Optimal Auctions Without Full Valuation Revelation Tuomas Sandholm and Andrew Gilpin Carnegie Mellon University.
Analysis of Supply Contracts with Total Minimum Commitment Yehuda Bassok and Ravi Anupindi presented by Zeynep YILDIZ.
Incomplete Contracts Renegotiation, Communications and Theory December 10, 2007.
Chapter 5 Inventory Control Subject to Uncertain Demand
Frontiers of Microeconomics
Adverse Selection & Renegotiation in Procurement (The Review of Economic Studies 1990) work of: Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole presented by: Deepak.
Static Games of Incomplete Information.. Mechanism design Typically a 3-step game of incomplete info Step 1: Principal designs mechanism/contract Step.
Principal - Agent Games. Sometimes asymmetric information develops after a contract has been signed In this case, signaling and screening do not help,
Asymmetric Information
Our final lecture analyzes optimal contracting in situations when the principal writing the contract has less information than the agent who accepts or.
Backup Contracts under Supply Risks and Stochastic Demand Jing Hou.
Matching Supply with Demand: An Introduction to Operations Management Gérard Cachon ChristianTerwiesch All slides in this file are copyrighted by Gerard.
© 2009 Institute of Information Management National Chiao Tung University Lecture Note II-3 Static Games of Incomplete Information Static Bayesian Game.
Monopoly with Incomplete Information Eric Maskin and John Riley The RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 15, No. 2 (Summer, 1984), pp Presented by:
Sequences of Take-It-or-Leave-it Offers: Near-Optimal Auctions Without Full Valuation Revelation Tuomas Sandholm and Andrew Gilpin Carnegie Mellon University.
Backup Agreements in Fashion Buying-The Value of Upstream Flexibility Eppen and Iyer (1997) Presented By: Hakan Umit 21 April 2003.
Lecture 2 in Contracts Employment Contracts This lecture studies how those who create and administer organizations design the incentives and institutional.
The Moral Hazard Problem Stefan P. Schleicher University of Graz
Inequity aversion in screening contracts: experimental evidence and model analysis IFORS, 15 th July 2014, Guido Voigt.
Asymmetric Information
Frank Cowell: Microeconomics Contract Design MICROECONOMICS Principles and Analysis Frank Cowell Almost essential Adverse selection Almost essential Adverse.
Channel Coordination and Quantity Discounts Z. Kevin Weng Management Science, Volume 41, Issue 9 (September, 1995), Prepared by: Çağrı LATİFOĞLU.
Supply Contracts with Total Minimum Commitments Multi-Product Case Zeynep YILDIZ.
Chapter 4 The Adverse Selection Problem Stefan P. Schleicher University of Graz Economics of Information Incentives and Contracts.
Chapter 13: Predatory Conduct: recent developments 1 Predatory Conduct: Recent Developments.
Lecture 5 Financial Incentives This lecture is paired with our previous one that discussed employee benefits. Here we focus on the reasons why monetary.
© 2010 Institute of Information Management National Chiao Tung University Chapter 7 Incentive Mechanism Principle-Agent Problem Production with Teams Competition.
Mechanism Design II CS 886:Electronic Market Design Sept 27, 2004.
Lecture 1 in Contracts Nonlinear Pricing This lecture studies how those who create and administer organizations design the incentives and institutional.
Channel Coordination and Quantity Discounts Z. Kevin Weng Presented by Jing Zhou.
Introduction Many organizations use decision rules to alleviate incentive problems as opposed to incentive contracts The principal typically retains some.
Frank Cowell: Contract Design CONTRACT DESIGN MICROECONOMICS Principles and Analysis Frank Cowell July Almost essential: Adverse selection Almost.
Frank Cowell: Microeconomics Moral Hazard MICROECONOMICS Principles and Analysis Frank Cowell Almost essential Risk Almost essential Risk Prerequisites.
The Base Model. Objectives of the chapter Describe the basic elements of the Basic Principal-Agent model Study the contracts that will emerge when information.
EOQ History –Interest on capital tied up in wages, material and overhead sets a maximum limit to the quantity of parts which can be profitably manufactured.
Unknown control costs1 ECON 4910 Spring 2007 Environmental Economics Lecture 10, Chapter 10 Lecturer: Finn R. Førsund.
11-1 Copyright ©2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall. Managing Economies of Scale in a Supply Chain: Cycle Inventory Role of Cycle.
EFFICIENT REDISTRIBUTION THROUGH THE REDUCTION OF COMPLIANCE COSTS
EFFICIENCY, MARKETS, AND GOVERNMENTS
Lecture 8 Asymmetric Information: Adverse Selection
Perfect Competition No external parties (such as the Government) regulate the price, quantity, or quality of any of the goods being bought and sold in.
Second degree price discrimination
CONCEPTS OF HYPOTHESIS TESTING
Markets with Asymmetric Information
Frontiers of Microeconomics
16/2/2019 Quantity Discounts in Supply Chain Coordination under Multi-level Information Asymmetry Zissis D.1, Ioannou G.1, Burnetas A.2
Managing Economies of Scale in a Supply Chain Cycle Inventory
Choice, Opportunity Costs, and Specialization
Chapter 38 Asymmetric Information
Frontiers of Microeconomics
Presentation transcript:

A Supplier’s Optimal Quantity Discount Policy Under Asymmetric Information Charles J. Corbett Xavier de Groote Presented by Jing Zhou

Agenda  Introduction  The Basic Model: Full Information  Optimal Contract Under Asymmetric Information  Comparing the Contracts  Discussion

Agenda  Introduction  The Basic Model: Full Information  Optimal Contract Under Asymmetric Information  Comparing the Contracts  Discussion

Motivation  Inefficiency occurs under self-interest Demand d SupplierBuyer Lot size Q Setup costs: Holding cost: Supply Chain k s + k b hbhb

Literature  Joint economic lot-sizing literature  The supplier wishes to induce the buyer to choose a higher lot size  Quantity discount scheme can achieve the jointly optimal lot size  The supplier has full information about the buyer’s cost structure.  Lal and Staelin (1984)  N groups of buyers of different sizes  Holding costs, order costs and demand rates vary between groups but not within groups  Optimal unified pricing policy (no closed-form)

In this paper  The buyer holds private information about her holding cost; The supplier knows the prior distribution of the holding cost  Arbitrary continuum of buyer types  Demand per unit time is known and constant, and is not affected by the lot sizing or contracting decision  The supplier can choose not to trade with buyers  Optimal contracts in both full information case and asymmetric information case (quantity discount)

Notation  cases considered (full information and asymmetric information)  range of buyer holding cost h b  supplier’s prior distribution and density over h b  payment from supplier to buyer, as a function of h b, under contract i  buyer, supplier and joint cost function (excluding quantity discount)  maximum net cost level acceptable to buyer and supplier (reservation net cost level)  buyer, supplier and joint net cost function in case i, after quantity discount  Partial derivative of P ( h b ) with respect to h b

Agenda  Introduction  The Basic Model: Full Information  Optimal Contract Under Asymmetric Information  Comparing the Contracts  Discussion

The Basic Model  Two decisions: lot size Q and quantity discount P(Q) per unit time from supplier to buyer  Cost Function (excluding discount) Optimal Lot Size (without contracting) Net Cost Function (after discount) TradeNo trade Buyer Supplier Largest allowable lot size Supply Chain

A Necessary Condition  If the joint costs under jointly optimal lot size Q j exceed, there will be no trade. Therefore, we need (1)

Cut-Off Point h * b  Because of the reservation net cost level,, the supplier choose a cut-off point h * b such that he will choose not to trade with buyers with holding cost h b > h * b

The Principal-Agent Framework  The supplier is the principal and the buyer is the agent (adverse selection).  The supplier proposes a “menu of contracts” or discount scheme, specifying the discount P(q) offered for any lot size q.  The buyer decides whether or not to accept the contract. She chooses some order lot size Q if accepts.  The supplier gives the buyer a discount of P(Q).

The Supplier’s Problem

Optimal Contract Under Full Information (First-Best)  Payment from supplier to buyer:  The buyer will choose the joint economic lot size Q j (h b )  The supplier keeps all efficiency gains  Condition (1) guarantees that for all

Agenda  Introduction  The Basic Model: Full Information  Optimal Contract Under Asymmetric Information  Comparing the Contracts  Discussion

Assumptions  Assumption 1 Decreasing reverse hazard rate: Many common distributions satisfy this assumption  Assumption 2 Rule out the problems caused by the distribution with thin tails  Neither of these assumptions on F(h b ) are necessary conditions

Recall: The Supplier’s Problem

Contracting Procedure  The buyer knows h b, unobserved by the supplier  The supplier offers a menu for any the buyer announces To ensure that IRb and IRs are satisfied, the supplier can set h * b such that IRb and IRs are met for all h b <=h * b  The buyer chooses to accept or reject the contract.  Accept ( h b <=h * b ): buyer choose buyer and supplier incur net costs per period of  Reject ( h b >h * b ) : both parties revert to their outside alternatives and incur net costs per period of, respectively

Revelation Principle  The revelation principle (Laffont and Tirole 1993) states that if there is an optimal contract for the supplier, then there exists an optimal contract under which the buyer will truthfully reveal her holding cost.  Formulate an IC constraint on P AI (h b ) : Let FOC be satisfied at and yields IC constraint:

 IRb Assume that IRb is always met for any, and for IRb becomes  The supplier’s problem Revelation Principle (Con’t)

Proposition 1

Proposition 1 (Con’t)

 There is a probability 1 - of no trade taking place.  For, Q AI (h b ) is decreasing in h b.  In general, cannot be found explicitly as it is impossible to write P AI (h b ) explicitly.  Both Q AI (h b ) and P AI (h b ) are strictly decreasing in h b, so there is a one-to-one mapping P AI (Q) which is increasing.  Supplier’s and buyer’s costs are increasing in h b.  The buyer’s net costs are equal to at.  At, the resulting lot size is equal to the jointly optimal lot size; as h b increases, the discrepancy between Q AI (h b ) and Q FI (h b ) increases. Some Findings

Agenda  Introduction  The Basic Model: Full Information  Optimal Contract Under Asymmetric Information  Comparing the Contracts  Discussion

Proposition 2

Agenda  Introduction  The Basic Model: Full Information  Optimal Contract Under Asymmetric Information  Comparing the Contracts  Discussion

Discussion  Contribution  Consider asymmetric information in EOQ environment: buyer’s holding cost is not observable to the supplier  The supplier can choose not to trade with buyer with certain large holding cost  Introduce the cut-off point policy

Discussion (Con’t)  Limitation  The assumptions on prior distribution are too specific  Lack of necessary proof or explanation of major results or findings  Demand is not affected by the lot sizing or reduction of unit price  Only the uncertainty about buyer’s holding cost is considered. More dimensions can be analyzed.

Thank you!