Willingness to Pay for Shifting Inventory Risk: The Role of Contractual Form

In order to reduce their inventory risk, firms can attempt to contract with their suppliers for shorter supply lead‐times, with their buyers for longer demand lead‐times, or both. We designed a controlled laboratory experiment to study contracts that shift a focal firm's inventory risk to its s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inProduction and operations management Vol. 23; no. 2; pp. 239 - 252
Main Authors Kremer, Mirko, Van Wassenhove, Luk N.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Los Angeles, CA Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.02.2014
SAGE Publications
Blackwell Publishers Inc
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:In order to reduce their inventory risk, firms can attempt to contract with their suppliers for shorter supply lead‐times, with their buyers for longer demand lead‐times, or both. We designed a controlled laboratory experiment to study contracts that shift a focal firm's inventory risk to its supply chain partners and address two questions. First, is it more effective if the cost of shifting inventory risk is framed as a fixed fee or in per‐unit cost terms? We find that, generally, our participants are willing to pay more to avoid supply–demand mismatches than the expected costs from such mismatches. This tendency to overpay is mitigated under fixed fee schemes. Second, does it matter whether the option to reduce inventory risk is the outcome of either increased responsiveness from the upstream supplier or advanced demand information from the downstream buyer? Our results suggest that this difference, when only a matter of framing, has no significant effect on willingness‐to‐pay.
Bibliography:ark:/67375/WNG-H3JT21DK-9
istex:D03AF6963CA0C93E9543BCC7C0B980C06B5F4F44
Smeal College of Business
ArticleID:POMS12179
ISSN:1059-1478
1937-5956
DOI:10.1111/poms.12179