Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
article

Research Note---Improving the Efficiency of Course Bidding at Business Schools: Field and Laboratory Studies

Published: 01 March 2008 Publication History

Abstract

Registrars' offices at most universities face the daunting task of allocating course seats to students. Because demand exceeds supply for many courses, course allocation needs to be done equitably and efficiently. Many schools use bidding systems in which student bids are used both to infer preferences over courses and to determine student priorities for courses. However, this dual role of bids can result in course allocations not being market outcomes, and in unnecessary efficiency loss, which can potentially be avoided with the use of an appropriate market mechanism. We report the result of field and laboratory studies that compare a typical course-bidding mechanism with the alternate Gale-Shapley Pareto-dominant market mechanism. Results from the field study conducted at the Ross School of Business, University of Michigan suggest that using the latter could vastly improve efficiency of course allocation systems while facilitating market outcomes. Laboratory experiments with greater design control confirm the superior efficiency of the Gale-Shapley mechanism. The paper tests theory that has important practical implications because it has the potential to affect the learning experience of very large numbers of students enrolled in educational institutions.

References

[1]
Abdulkadiro¿lu, A., T. Sönmez. 1999. House allocation with existing tenants. J. Econom. Theory 88 233-260.
[2]
Abdulkadiro¿lu, A., T. Sönmez. 2003. School choice: A mechanism design approach. Amer. Econom. Rev. 93 729-747.
[3]
Abdulkadiro¿lu, A., P. Pathak, A. E. Roth. 2005a. The New York city high school match. Amer. Econom. Rev., Papers Proc. 95(2) 364-367.
[4]
Abdulkadiro¿lu, A., P. Pathak, A. E. Roth, T. Sönmez. 2005b. The Boston public school match. Amer. Econom. Rev. Papers Proc. 95(2) 368-371.
[5]
Amaldoss, W., S. Jain. 2002. David vs. Goliath: An analysis of asymmetric mixed-strategy games and experimental evidence. Management Sci. 48 972-991.
[6]
Amaldoss, W., R. J. Meyer, J. S. Raju, A. Rapoport. 2000. Collaborating to compete. Marketing Sci. 19 105-126.
[7]
Balinski, M., T. Sönmez. 1999. A tale of two mechanisms: Student placement. J. Econom. Theory 84 73-94.
[8]
Camerer, C. F., R. M. Hogarth. 1999. The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. J. Risk Uncertainty 19 7-42.
[9]
Chen, Y., T. Sönmez. 2002. Improving efficiency of on-campus housing: An experimental study. Amer. Econom. Rev. 92(5) 1669-1686.
[10]
Chen, Y., T. Sönmez. 2006. School choice: An experimental study. J. Econom. Theory 127 2002-2031.
[11]
Dholakia, U. M., I. Simonson. 2005. The effect of explicit reference points on consumer choice and online bidding behavior. Marketing Sci. 24 206-217.
[12]
Fay, S. 2004. Partial-repeat-bidding in the name-your-own-price channel. Marketing Sci. 23 407-418.
[13]
Gale, D., L. Shapley. 1962. College admissions and the stability of marriage. Amer. Math. Monthly 69 9-15.
[14]
Haruvy, E., I. Erev, D. Sonsino. 2001. The medium prizes paradox: Evidence from a simulated casino. J. Risk Uncertainty 22 251-261.
[15]
Ho, T.-H., K. Weigelt. 1996. Task complexity, equilibrium selection, and learning: An experimental study. Management Sci. 42 659-679.
[16]
Ho, T.-H., K. Weigelt. 2005. Trust building among strangers. Management Sci. 51(4) 519-530.
[17]
Katok, E., A. E. Roth. 2004. Auctions of homogeneous goods with increasing returns: Experimental comparison of alternative "Dutch" auctions. Management Sci. 50 1044-1063.
[18]
Kelso, A. S., V. P. Crawford. 1982. Job matching, coalition formation, and gross substitutes. Econometrica 50 1483-1504.
[19]
Krishna, A., Y. Wang. 2007. The relationship between top trading cycle and top trading cycle and chains mechanisms. J. Econom. Theory 132(1) 539-547.
[20]
Rapoport, A., I. Erev, R. Zwick. 1995. An experimental study of buyer-seller negotiation with one-sided incomplete information and time discounting. Management Sci. 41 377-394.
[21]
Roth, A. E., E. Peranson. 1999. The redesign of the matching market for American physicians: Some engineering aspects of economic design. Amer. Econom. Rev. 89 748-780.
[22]
Roth, A. E., T. Sönmez, M. U. Ünver. 2005. A kidney exchange clearinghouse in New England. Amer. Econom. Rev., Papers Proc. 95(May) 376-380.
[23]
Shugan, S. M. 2005. Marketing and designing transaction games. Marketing Sci. 24 525-530.
[24]
Sönmez, T., M. U. Ünver. 2005. Course bidding at business schools. Boston College Working Papers in Economics 618, http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/bocbocoec/618.htm.
[25]
Srivastava, J., D. Chakravarti, A. Rapoport. 2000. Price and margin negotiations in marketing channels: An experimental study of sequential bargaining under one-sided uncertainty and opportunity cost of delay. Marketing Sci. 19 163-184.
[26]
Wang, Y., A. Krishna. 2006. Timeshare allocations: Theory and experiment. Management Sci. 52(August) 1223-1238.
[27]
Zwick, R., X. Chen. 1999. What price fairness: A bargaining study. Management Sci. 45 804-823.

Cited By

View all
  1. Research Note---Improving the Efficiency of Course Bidding at Business Schools: Field and Laboratory Studies

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image Marketing Science
    Marketing Science  Volume 27, Issue 2
    March 2008
    55 pages

    Publisher

    INFORMS

    Linthicum, MD, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 01 March 2008
    Received: 27 February 2006

    Author Tags

    1. auction
    2. bidding
    3. consumer behavior
    4. experimental economics
    5. field experiment
    6. indivisible goods
    7. market design
    8. matching
    9. mechanism design

    Qualifiers

    • Article

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 19 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all

    View Options

    View options

    Login options

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media