Supply chain coordination with information sharing in the presence of trust and trustworthiness: a behavioral model

The strategic use of private information causes efficiency losses in traditional principal-agent settings. One stream of research states that these efficiency losses cannot be overcome if all agents use their private information strategically. Yet, another stream of research highlights the importance of communication, trust and trustworthiness in supply chain management. The underlying work links the concepts of communication, trust and trustworthiness to a traditional principal-agent setting in a supply chain environment. Surprisingly, it can be shown that communication and trust can actually lead to increasing efficiency losses although there is a substantial level of trustworthiness.

Setup Cost Reduction and Supply Chain Coordination in Case of Asymmetric Information

Screening contracts are a common approach to solve supply chain coordination problems under asymmetric information. Previous research in this area shows that asymmetric information leads to supply chain coordination deficits. We extend the standard framework of lotsizing decisions under asymmetric information by allowing investments in setup cost reduction. We find that asymmetric information leads to an overinvestment in setup cost reduction. Yet, the overall effect on supply chain performance is ambiguous. We show that these results holds for a wide variety of investment functions.

Contracting under asymmetric holding cost information in a serial supply chain with a nearly profit maximizing buyer

Screening contracts (or non-linear "menu of contracts") are frequently used for aligning the incentives in supply chains with private information. In this context, it is assumed that all supply chain parties are strictly (expected) profit maximizing and, therefore, sensible to even arbitrarily small pay-off differences between contract alternatives. However, previous behavioral work on contracting under asymmetric information in supply chains shows that agents (buyers) are not always strictly profit maximizing. Instead, they sometimes tend to choose contracts that have only a minor impact on their own performance but a substantially negative impact on the principal\u27s (supplier\u27s) and the overall supply chain\u27s performance. Thus, these studies indicate that the buyers are in fact not strictly but only nearly profit maximizing when making their contract choices. The present work relaxes the assumption of the strictly profit maximizing buyer in a serial supply chain for a lotsizing framework with asymmetrically distributed holding cost information and deterministic end-customer demand. The study provides researchers and managers an approach on how to account for the buyer\u27s insensitivity to arbitrarily small pay-off differences while providing a solution method for the resulting non-linear mathematical program. A numerical study compares the advantages of the "behavioral robust" contract assuming only nearly profit maximizing buyers against the classical screening contract assuming strictly profit maximizing buyers. The results highlight that supply chain performance losses can be substantially reduced under the behavioral robust contract

Supply chain coordination with information sharing in the presence of trust and trustworthiness: A behavioral model

The strategic use of private information causes efficiency losses in traditional principal-agent settings. One stream of research states that these efficiency losses cannot be overcome if all agents use their private information strategically. Yet, another stream of research highlights the importance of communication, trust and trustworthiness in supply chain management. The underlying work links the concepts of communication, trust and trustworthiness to a traditional principal-agent setting in a supply chain environment. Surprisingly, it can be shown that communication and trust can actually lead to increasing efficiency losses although there is a substantial level of trustworthiness

The Impact of Cheap Talk on Supply Chain Performance in Case of Asymmetric Information: An Experimental Investigation

The use of screening contracts is a common approach to solve supply chain coordination problems under asymmetric information. One major assumption in this context is that subjects will rather use their private information strategically than to reveal them truthfully, if they do not get any incentives to do this. This harms supply chain performance. This paper investigates the influence of costless pre-game communication (i.e. communication without any direct incentives) between a supplier and a buyer in a lotsizing framework. A laboratory experiment was conducted to test, whether this costless pre-game communication has (in contradiction to standard game-theory) an influence on supply chain coordination.experimental economics, screening contracts, supply chain coordination

Dynamic buy-back for product recovery in end-of-life spare parts procurement

The efficient supply of spare parts is of prime concern for OEMs. Next to the traditional spare parts sources in form of final order and remanufacturing, the option to buy back broken products prevents the OEM from fulfilling his spare parts availability obligation in the end-of-life phase and increases his ability to remanufacture. This contribution seeks to identify optimal buy-back strategies for different settings regarding information availability and buy-back flexibility. A numerical study analyzes circumstances under which buy-back is especially beneficial for the OEM.Inventory Management, Spare Parts Management, Reverse Logistics, Buy-back

Capacity reservation and wholesale price contracts under forecast sharing: a behavioral assessment

We study a supply chain setup in which a buyer has private end customer demand information that she can share with the supplier. The demand information is relevant to the supplier's capacity decision. We address the question of whether the supplier benefits from installing nonlinear capacity reservation contracts rather than wholesale price contracts. We contribute to the literature by providing the first internally valid comparison of both contracts with human decision makers. We setup an experimental study with four treatments (both contracts as well as different supplier margins). From a supplier's perspective, we observe that the capacity reservation contract significantly outperforms the wholesale price contract; however, the supplier's benefit from using capacity reservation is much higher under low margins than under high margins. Regarding supply chain performance, the positive effect for the supplier exceeds the negative effect for the buyer in the low margin setting, while the two effects neutralize each other in the high margin setting. We identify behavioral factors explaining deviations from the theoretical predictions. In particular, we observe naïve anchoring and trust as strong behavioral drivers common to both contract types. Even though the complexity of the nonlinear contract results in weaker performance than that predicted by theory, our study reveals that suppliers can still benefit from installing them; thus, providing important managerial implications for the choice of the contract type

Strategic risk in contract design

Supply chains facing asymmetric information can either operate in a cooperative mode with information and benefit sharing or can choose a non-cooperative form of interaction and align their incentives via screening contracts. In the cooperative mode, supply chain efficiency can be achieved, but high levels of trust and trustworthiness are required. In the non-cooperative mode, the contract mechanism guarantees a second best supply chain performance, but only if all parties choose their equilibrium strategies without trembles. Experimental evidence, however, shows that both operating modes often fail due to strategic risk. Cooperation is disrupted by deceptive signals and the lack of trust, whereas non-cooperative strategies suffer from persistent out-of-equilibrium behavior. We present an experiment on supply chain interaction with reduced strategic risk in both operating modes. We find that supply chain performance can reach a second-best level in either operating mode, if strategic risk is sufficiently reduced. We present two means to reduce strategic risk. First, a punishment mechanism leads to a better matching of trust and trustworthiness and supports the cooperative operating mode. Second, an enforcement of self-selection supports the non-cooperative equilibrium by increasing the attractiveness of screening contracts. We conclude that supply chain managers should seek to reduce the variability of the supply chain partners\u27 behavior no matter what operating mode is considered

Setup Cost Reduction and Supply Chain Coordination in Case of Asymmetric Information

Screening contracts are a common approach to solve supply chain coordination problems under asymmetric information. Previous research in this area shows that asymmetric information leads to supply chain coordination deficits. We extend the standard framework of lotsizing decisions under asymmetric information by allowing investments in setup cost reduction. We find that asymmetric information leads to an overinvestment in setup cost reduction. Yet, the overall effect on supply chain performance is ambiguous. We show that these results holds for a wide variety of investment functions

The Impact of Information Sharing on Supply Chain Performance in Case of Asymmetric Information

The use of screening contracts is a common approach to solve supply chain coordination problems under asymmetric information. One major assumption in this context is that subjects will rather use their private information strategically than to reveal them truthfully, if they do not get any incentives to do this. This harms supply chain performance. This paper investigates the influence of costless pre-game communication (i.e. communication without any direct incentives) between a supplier and a buyer in a lotsizing framework. A laboratory experiment was conducted to test, whether this costless pre-game communication has (in contradiction to standard game-theory) an influence on supply chain coordination