全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

Opportunism in Supply Chain Recommendations: A Dynamic Optimization Approach

DOI: 10.4236/me.2026.171003, PP. 26-38

Keywords: Trust Dynamics, Strategic Deception, Lying Behavior, Dynamic Optimization, Credibility Management

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Supply chain partners often face a fundamental trade-off: dishonesty can provide immediate rewards, but excessive lying erodes credibility and undermines future opportunities. Prior research has documented the prevalence of deception and the value of trust, yet extant studies examine these behaviors as static choices. Much less is known about how deception evolves dynamically and how trust is eroded and restored over time. We develop a dynamic framework in which deception is treated as a decision and trust as a state that both decay naturally and are further depleted by dishonesty. The payoff structure reflects the dual role of credibility: it enables immediate benefits from deception but must be preserved to sustain future influence. To address analytical challenges, we adopt a discrete-time formulation and apply numerical optimization methods. The analysis reveals three key insights. First, lying occurs in episodic bursts rather than continuously, with opportunistic spikes in deception followed by pauses that allow trust to recover. Second, the duration of lying episodes increases with the strength of incentives to deceive. Third, deception is amplified when opportunities persist in stable environments, leading to longer episodes of dishonesty. Managerially, our findings caution against incentive schemes that overemphasize short-term performance, as they may inadvertently foster sustained opportunism. Instead, mechanisms that balance immediate gains with credibility preservation—such as rotating advisors, auditing, or transparency requirements—can mitigate the erosion of trust and sustain collaboration.

References

[1]  Ariely, D. (2012). The (Honest) Truth about Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone-Especially Ourselves. HarperCollins.
[2]  Ariely, D., & Shalvi, S. (2013). The Dark Side of Creativity: Original Thinkers Can Be More Dishonest. Psychological Science, 22, 13-17.
[3]  Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2006). What’s the Right Price? A Psychological Perspective on Pricing. Journal of Marketing Research, 43, 190-195.
[4]  Betts, J. T. (2010). Practical Methods for Optimal Control and Estimation Using Nonlinear Programming (2nd ed.). SIAM.
[5]  Boles, T. L., Croson, R. T. A., & Murnighan, J. K. (2000). Deception and Retribution in Repeated Ultimatum Bargaining. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83, 235-259.
https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2908
[6]  Cabral, L. M. B. (2000). Stretching Firm and Brand Reputation. The RAND Journal of Economics, 31, 658-673.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2696353
[7]  Charness, G., & Dufwenberg, M. (2006). Promises and Partnership. Econometrica, 74, 1579-1601.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00719.x
[8]  Dockner, E. J., Jorgensen, S., Long, N. V., & Sorger, G. (2000). Differential Games in Economics and Management Science. Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511805127
[9]  Ellingsen, T., & Johannesson, M. (2004). Promises, Threats and Fairness. The Economic Journal, 114, 397-420.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2004.00214.x
[10]  Fischbacher, U., & Föllmi-Heusi, F. (2013). Lies in Disguise—An Experimental Study on Cheating. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11, 525-547.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jeea.12014
[11]  Gneezy, U. (2005). Deception: The Role of Consequences. American Economic Review, 95, 384-394.
https://doi.org/10.1257/0002828053828662
[12]  Levin, J. (2003). Relational Incentive Contracts. American Economic Review, 93, 835-857.
https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803322157115
[13]  Levine, E. E., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2015). Prosocial Lies: When Deception Breeds Trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 126, 88-106.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.10.007
[14]  Nerlove, M., & Arrow, K. J. (1962). Optimal Advertising Policy under Dynamic Conditions. Economica, 29, 129-142.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2551549
[15]  Ozer, Ö., & Zheng, Y. (2017). Trust, Trustworthiness, and Information Sharing in Supply Chains. Management Science, 63, 1110-1130.
[16]  Özer, Ö., Subramanian, U., & Wang, Y. (2018). Information Sharing, Advice Provision, or Delegation: What Leads to Higher Trust and Trustworthiness? Management Science, 64, 474-493.
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2617
[17]  Özer, Ö., Zheng, Y., & Chen, K. (2011). Trust in Forecast Information Sharing. Management Science, 57, 1111-1137.
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1334
[18]  Rao, A. V. (2009). A Survey of Numerical Methods for Optimal Control. Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 135, 497-528.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133