Advertisement

Customer Incentives in Time-Based Environment

  • Jian Chen
  • Nan Zhang
Part of the Integrated Series in Information Systems book series (ISIS, volume 16)

Abstract

In this chapter, we explore customer incentive issues. Time-based competition was first highlighted explicitly in the literature in the late 1980s by Stalk who argued that time has become a significant source of competitive advantage. Since Stalk’s introduction of this paradigm, it has attracted a lot of attentions, and its importance apparently has been recognized. In time-based environment, customers have become more and more sensitive to the range of choices and the degree of responsiveness provided by firms. However, production and consumption happen simultaneously in service production, which makes waiting in queue inevitable. Demand management is an effective way to solve this problem. Since customers’ private information such as delay cost is critical for demand management, a key question is how a firm can provide incentives to its customers so that it is in their interest to truthfully disclose their information.

This chapter seeks to provide a comprehensive review of the literature and explore further research of customer incentive issues. We begin our review of the literature by introduction of some pre-requisite knowledge, including the objective of the firm and the customer’s utility function. Then we discuss the literature of mechanism design and categorize the existing literature into two broad classes: price auction and direct mechanism. In direct mechanism, a customer is required to report his delay cost when he arrives at the firm. Based on his announcement, the firm assigns a priority to him and imposes a corresponding priority toll. Through designing the assignment and pricing rules properly, customers will disclose the truth. There are also some articles referring to price auction. In their settings, customers should bid for priorities when they arrive. The key of price auction is to find the equilibrium bid function.

Most of the literature discusses the problem of priority assignment, i.e., managing demand in the same period. For service enterprises, it is more meaningful to assign demand to different periods. In the third section of this chapter, we present a model with several periods each providing different value. Actually, heterogeneous service is a main reason that results in imbalance between demand and supply. We first obtain the optimal assignment and pricing rules when the firm is omniscient and acts on a centralized administrative basis. Then we prove that this optimal mechanism is also incentive compatible, i.e., the mechanism enables the decentralization of decisions while maintaining optimality. According to the optimal mechanism, high-value periods will serve more customers who are more patient.

We then conclude the chapter with an overall summary and the further research to be carried out in this realm, including models with general delay cost structure and perishable value, integrated capacity decision and real-time decision models.

Key words

Time-based competition customer incentive queuing mechanism design 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Afeche, P., and Mendelson, H., 2004, Pricing and priority auctions in queueing systems with a generalized delay cost structure, Management science. 50(7): 869–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balachandran, K.R., 1972, Purchasing priorities in queues, Management Science. 18(5): 319–326.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. Becker, G.S., 1965, A theory of the allocation of time, Economic Journal. 75(299): 493–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blackburn, J.D., 1991, Time-based competition: speeding new product development, in: Modern Production Concepts: Theory and Applications, G. Fandel and G. Zapfel, ed., Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Bradford, R.M., 1996, Pricing, routing and incentive compatibility in multiserver queues, European Journal of Operational Research. 89(2): 226–236.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, H., and Frank, M., 2004, Monopoly pricing when customers queue, HE Transactions. 36(6): 569–581.Google Scholar
  7. Cox, D., and Smith, W., 1961, Queues, Methuen and Company, Ltd., London.Google Scholar
  8. Dewan, S., and Mendelson, H., 1990, User delay costs and internal pricing for a service facility, Management Science. 36(12): 1502–1517.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Daniels, N.C., and Essaides, G., 1993, Time-based Competition, Economic Intelligence Unit, London.Google Scholar
  10. Edelson, N.M., and Hildebrand, D.K., 1975, Congestion tolls for Poisson queuing processes, Econometrica. 43(1): 81–92.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Gibbons, R., 1992, A Prime in Game Theory, Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Hiller, F.S., and Gerald J.L., 1990, Introduction to Stochastic Models in Operations Research, 5th. ed., McGraw-Hill, Inc.Google Scholar
  13. Johnson, P.M., 2006, A Glossary of Political Economy Terms; http://www.auburn.edu/~johnspm/gloss.Google Scholar
  14. Kleinrock, L., 1967, Optimum bribing for queue position, Operations Research. 15(2): 304–218.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Kittsteiner T., and Moldovanu, B., 2005, Priority auctions and queue disciplines that depend on processing time, Management Science. 51(2): 236–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lui, F., 1985, An equilibrium queuing model of bribery, Journal of Political Economy. 93(4): 760–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Myerson, R.B., 1979, Incentive compatibility and the bargaining problem, Econometrica. 47(1): 61–74.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Mendelson, H., 1985, Pricing computer services: queueing effects, Communications of the ACM. 38(3): 312–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mendelson, H., and Whang, S., 1990, Optimal incentive-compatible priority pricing for the M/M/l queue, Operations Research. 38(5): 870–883.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. Naor, P., 1969, The regulation of queue size by levying tolls, Econometrica. 37(1): 15–24.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Png, I.P.L., and Reitman, D., 1994, Service time competition, RAND Journal of Economics. 25(4): 619–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Porter, M.E., 1980, Generic competitive strategies, in: Competitive Strategy, Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Quinn, J.B., Baruch, J.J., and Paquette, P.C., 1987, Scientific American, 257(2): 50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sasser, W.E., 1976, Match supply and demand in service industries, Harvard Business Review. 54(6): 133–140.Google Scholar
  25. Stalk, G. Jr., 1988, Time-the next source of competitive advantage, Harvard Business Review. 66(4): 41–51.Google Scholar
  26. Stalk, G. Jr., and Hout, T.M., 1990, Competing Against Time: How Time-based Competition is Reshaping Global Markets, Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  27. Stidham, S., 1992, Pricing and capacity decisions for a service facility: stability and multiple local optima, Management Science. 38(8): 1121–1139.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tien, J.M., and Berg, D., 2003, A case for service systems engineering, Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering. 12(1): 13–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tucker, R.B., 1991, Managing the Future: Ten Driving Forces of Change for the’ 90s, Putnam, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jian Chen
    • 1
  • Nan Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.Tsinghua UniversityChina

Personalised recommendations