Flexibility in Long-Term Relationships: An Experimental Study

References

• Bamford J, Ernst D, Fubini DG (2004) Launching a world-class joint venture. Harvard Business Rev. 82(2):90–100.Google Scholar
• Beer R, Ahn H-S, Leider S (2018) Incentive and competition effects of supplier awards. Working Paper 1368, University of Michigan's Ross School of Business, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
• Bernard M, Fanning J, Yuksel S (2018) Finding cooperators: Sorting through repeated interaction. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 147(March):76–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bernstein F, DeCroix GA (2004) Decentralized pricing and capacity decisions in a multitier system with modular assembly. Management Sci. 50(9):1293–1308.Link, Google Scholar
• Bolton G, Loebbecke C, Ockenfels A (2008) Does competition promote trust and trustworthiness in online trading? An experimental study. J. Management Inform. Systems 25(2):145–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bostian AJA, Holt CA, Smith AM (2008) Newsvendor “pull-to-center” effect: Adaptive learning in a laboratory experiment. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 10(4):590–608.Link, Google Scholar
• Brandts J, Cooper D (2006) A change would do you good: An experimental study of how to overcome coordination failure in organizations. Amer. Econom. Rev. 96(3):669–693.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brechbühl H, ed. (2006) Strategic partnering: Managing joint ventures and alliances. Thought Leadership Roundtable on Digital Strategies (Glassmeyer/McNamee Center for Digital Strategies, Tuck School of Business Dartmouth University, Hanover, NH).Google Scholar
• Cachon GP, Lariviere M (2001) Contracting to assure supply: How to share demand forecasts in a supply chain. Management Sci. 47(5):629–646.Link, Google Scholar
• Cacioppo JT, Petty RE (1982) The need for cognition. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 42(1):116–131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer CF, Ho T-H, Chong J-K (2002) Sophisticated experience-weighted attraction learning and strategic teaching in repeated games. J. Econom. Theor. 104(1):137–188.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis A, Hyndman K (2018) An experimental investigation of managing quality through monetary and relational incentives. Management Sci. 64(5):2345–2365.Link, Google Scholar
• D’Evelyn S (2013) Dump, date or marry: Endogenous group formation with varied contract length. Working paper, Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
• Fan J, Kwasnica AM, Thomas DJ (2018) Paying for teamwork: Supplier coordination with endogenously selected groups. Production Oper. Management 27(6):1089–1101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Frederick S (2005) Cognitive reflection and decision making. J. Econom. Perspect. 19(4):25–42.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grundberg S, Stoll JD (2012) Nokia sales face more hurdles. Wall Street Journal (June 22), http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304898704577480340752531300.Google Scholar
• Han SL, Wilson DT, Dant SP (1993) Buyer-supplier relationships today. Indust. Marketing Management 22(4):331–338.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hendricks KB, Singhal VR (2005) Association between supply chain glitches and operating performance. Management Sci. 51(5):695–711.Link, Google Scholar
• Honhon D, Hyndman K (2018) Flexibility and reputation in repeated prisoner’s dilemma games. Working paper, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson.Google Scholar
• Hyndman K, Embrey M (2018) The econometrics of experiments. Leider S Katok E, Donohue K, eds. Handbook of Behavioral Operations Management (John Wiley & Sons, New York), 35–88.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hyndman K, Kraiselburd S, Watson N (2013) Aligning capacity decisions in supply chains when demand forecasts are private information: Theory and experiment. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 15(1):102–117.Link, Google Scholar
• Hyndman K, Kraiselburd S, Watson N (2014) Coordination in games with complementarities: An experiment on fixed vs. random matching. Production Oper. Management 23(2):221–238.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hyndman K, Terracol A, Vaksmann J (2009) Learning and sophistication in coordination games. Experiment. Econom. 12(4):450–472.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hyndman K, Özbay E, Schotter A, Ehrblatt W (2012) Convergence: An experimental study of teaching and learning in repeated games. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 10(3):573–604.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kalwani MU, Narayandas N (1995) Long-term manufacturer supplier relationships: Do they pay off for supplier firms? J. Marketing 59(1):1–16.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knez M, Camerer CF (1994) Creating expectational assets in the laboratory: Coordination in “weakest-link” games. Strategic Management J. 15(S1):101–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kovach S (2014) Microsoft closes its $7.2 billion purchase of Nokia. Business Insider (April 25), http://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-closes-nokia-acquisition-2014-4.Google Scholar
• KPMG (2009) Joint ventures: A tool for growth during an economic downturn. Report, KPMG International, Amstelveen, Netherlands.Google Scholar
• Kwon HD, Lippman SA, McCardle KF, Tang CS (2010) Project management contracts with delayed payments. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 12(4):692–707.Link, Google Scholar
• Larsen MM, Pedersen T, Stepniov D (2010) LEGO Group: An outsourcing journey. HBS Case 910M094, Harvard Business School, Boston.Google Scholar
• Liker JK, Choi TY (2004) Building deep supplier relationships. Harvard Business Rev. 82(12):104–113.Google Scholar
• Lunsford JL (2007) Boeing scrambles to repair problems with new plane. Wall Street Journal (December 7), https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB119698754167616531.Google Scholar
• Neuville J (1997) La stratégie de la confiance: Le partenariat industrial observé depuis le fournisseur. Sociol. du Travail 20(3):297–319.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Özer Ö, Zheng Y, Chen K-Y (2011) Trust in forecast information sharing. Management Sci. 57(6):1111–1137.Link, Google Scholar
• Page T, Putterman L, Unel B (2005) Voluntary association in public goods experiments: Reciprocity, mimicry and efficiency. Econom. J. 115(506):1032–1053.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Riedl A, Rohde IMT, Strobel M (2016) Efficient coordination in weakest-link games. Rev. Econom. Stud. 83(2):737–767.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roth AE, Murnighan JK (1978) Equilibrium behavior and repeated play of the prisoner’s dilemma. J. Math. Psych. 17(2):189–198.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schweitzer ME, Cachon GP (2000) Decision bias in the newsvendor problem with a known demand distribution: Experimental evidence. Management Sci. 46(3):404–420.Link, Google Scholar
• Shokoohyar S, Qi A, Katok E (2018) Project management under risk sharing. Working paper, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson.Google Scholar
• Tang CS, Zimmerman JD, Nelson JI (2009) Managing new product development and supply chain risks: The Boeing 787 case. Supply Chain Forum 10(2):74–86.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Terracol A, Vaksmann J (2009) Dumbing down rational players: Learning and teaching in an experimental game. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 70(1–2):54–71.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tomlin, B (2003) Capacity investments in supply chains: Sharing the gain rather than sharing the pain. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 5(4):317–333.Link, Google Scholar
• Uzzi B (1996) The sources and consequence of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 61(4):675–698.Crossref, Google Scholar
• van Huyck J, Battalio R, Beil R (1990) Tacit coordination games, strategic uncertainty and coordination failure. Amer. Econom. Rev. 80(1):234–248.Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Gerchak Y (2003) Capacity games in assembly systems with uncertain demand. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 5(3):252–267.Link, Google Scholar
• Wilson AJ, Wu H (2017) At-will relationships: How an option to walk away affects cooperation and efficiency. Games Econom. Behav. 102(March):487–507.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xu X, Zhao Y (2013) Incentives and coordination in project-driven supply chains. Working paper, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ.Google Scholar