Contract Preferences and Performance for the Loss-Averse Supplier: Buyback vs. Revenue Sharing

被引:123
|
作者
Zhang, Yinghao [1 ]
Donohue, Karen [2 ]
Cui, Tony Haitao [2 ]
机构
[1] Salisbury Univ, Perdue Sch Business, Salisbury, MD 21801 USA
[2] Univ Minnesota, Carlson Sch Management, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
supply contracts; buyback; revenue sharing; loss aversion; behavioral operations; BOUNDEDLY RATIONAL CUSTOMERS; PROSPECT-THEORY; REFERENCE DEPENDENCE; CHAIN COORDINATION; NEWSVENDOR PROBLEM; EQUITY PREMIUM; INFORMATION; DISPOSITION; FAIRNESS; DECISION;
D O I
10.1287/mnsc.2015.2182
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Prior theory claims that buyback and revenue-sharing contracts achieve equivalent channel-coordinating solutions when applied in a dyadic supplier-retailer setting. This suggests that a supplier should be indifferent between the two contracts. However, the sequence and magnitude of costs and revenues (i.e., losses and gains) vary significantly between the contracts, suggesting the supplier's preference of contract type, and associated contract parameter values, may vary with the level of loss aversion. We investigate this phenomenon through two studies. The first is a preliminary study investigating whether human suppliers are indeed indifferent between these two contracts. Using a controlled laboratory experiment, with human subjects taking on the role of the supplier having to choose between contracts, we find that contract preferences change with the ratio of overage and underage costs for the channel (i.e., the newsvendor critical ratio). In particular, a buyback contract is preferred for products with low critical ratio, whereas revenue sharing is preferred for products with high critical ratio. We show these results are consistent with the behavioral tendency of loss aversion and are more significant for subjects who exhibit higher loss aversion tendencies in an out of context task. In the second (main) study, we examine differences in the performance of buyback and revenue-sharing contracts when suppliers have the authority to set contract parameters. We find that the contract frame influences the way parameters are set and the critical ratio again plays an important role. More specifically, revenue-sharing contracts are more profitable for the supplier than buyback contracts in a high critical ratio environment when accounting for the supplier's parameter-specification behavior. Also, there is little difference in performance between the two contracts in a low critical ratio environment. These results can help inform supply managers on what types of contracts to use in different critical ratio settings.
引用
收藏
页码:1734 / 1754
页数:21
相关论文
共 41 条
  • [1] Revenue-Sharing Contract with Supplier Having Loss-Averse Preferences
    Pang Qinghua
    Dong, Du
    Chao, Cheng
    2009 6TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SERVICE SYSTEMS AND SERVICE MANAGEMENT, VOLS 1 AND 2, 2009, : 241 - +
  • [2] Loss-Averse Supply Chain Coordination with a Revenue-Sharing Contract
    Wu, Ming
    Li, Xin
    Chen, Yuhao
    MATHEMATICS, 2024, 12 (06)
  • [3] Revenue sharing bids of a loss-averse supplier for a new product development contract: a multi-method investigation
    Ribbink, Dina
    Pun, Hubert
    Yan, Tingting
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OPERATIONS & PRODUCTION MANAGEMENT, 2022, 42 (12) : 1853 - 1877
  • [4] Supply Chain Coordination Problem with Loss-averse Retailer and Buyback Contract
    Shi, Kuiran
    Zhang, Xiao
    Zhao, Lin
    2008 4TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, NETWORKING AND MOBILE COMPUTING, VOLS 1-31, 2008, : 6836 - +
  • [5] Contract design and comparison under the opportunity cost of working capital: Buyback vs. revenue sharing
    Zhang, Shuhua
    Tong, Xiangbin
    Jin, Xing
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2023, 309 (02) : 845 - 856
  • [6] Supply Chain Coordination with a Loss-Averse Retailer and Combined Contract
    Liu, Wei
    Song, Shiji
    Qiao, Ying
    Zhao, Han
    MATHEMATICS, 2020, 8 (04)
  • [7] Incentive Contract with Loss-averse Manufacturer
    Guo, Hongmei
    Gu, Shuiliang
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 33RD CHINESE CONTROL AND DECISION CONFERENCE (CCDC 2021), 2021, : 6031 - 6036
  • [8] Prepositioning of emergency supplies and channel coordination: Considering a loss-averse supplier and government penalty
    Liu, Yang
    Tian, Jun
    Yu, Ning
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION ECONOMICS, 2025, 282
  • [9] Loss-Averse Preferences, Performance, and Career Success of Institutional Investors
    Bodnaruk, Andriy
    Simonov, Andrei
    REVIEW OF FINANCIAL STUDIES, 2016, 29 (11) : 3140 - 3176
  • [10] Three-echelon supply chain coordination with a loss-averse retailer and revenue sharing contracts
    Hu, Benyong
    Meng, Chao
    Xu, Dong
    Son, Young Jun
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION ECONOMICS, 2016, 179 : 192 - 202