Home Business & Economics Quality of Outsourced Services, Opportunism and Contract Design
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Quality of Outsourced Services, Opportunism and Contract Design

  • Jean Beuve EMAIL logo and Lisa Chever
Published/Copyright: May 24, 2017
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

This paper estimates the impact of contract design on the enforceability of quality in outsourced public contracts. Using panel data from 102 cleaning contracts, our results suggest that quality enforcement depends highly on the ex ante contracting process. Such findings are consistent with recent theoretical contributions which consider that the verifiability of agents’ actions is endogenously determined by the principals’ investments in drafting an explicit contract pertaining to the quality of the agent’s output. Moreover, since those quality improvements are not accompanied by price increases, our results suggest that public contract managers have significant leeway to reduce opportunistic behavior for standard transactions.

JEL Classification: D82; L15; L24

References

Amaral, M., S. Saussier, and A. Yvrande-Billon. 2013. “Expected Number of Bidders and Winning Bids: Evidence from the London Bus Tendering Model,” 47 Journal of Transport, Economics and Policy 17–34.Search in Google Scholar

Angrist, J.D., and J.-S. Pischke. 2008. Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist’s Companion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.2307/j.ctvcm4j72Search in Google Scholar

Ascher, K. 1987. The Politics of Privatization: Contracting Out Public Services. London: Macmillan Education.10.1007/978-1-349-18622-8Search in Google Scholar

Australian Industry Commission. 1996. Competitive Tendering and Contracting by Public Sector Agencies. Melbourne: Australian Government Publishing Service.Search in Google Scholar

Bajari, P., and S. Tadelis. 2001. “Incentives versus Transaction Costs: A Theory of Procurement Contracts,” 32 RAND Journal of Economics 387–407.10.2307/2696361Search in Google Scholar

Blom-Hansen, J. 2003. “Is Private Delivery of Public Services Really Cheaper? Evidence from Public Road Maintenance in Denmark,” 115 Public Choice 419–438.10.1023/A:1024274527502Search in Google Scholar

Brown, T.L., and M. Potosky. 2005. “Transaction Costs and Contracting: The Practitioner Perspective,” 28 Public Performance and Management Review 326–351.Search in Google Scholar

Cabral, S., and S. Saussier. 2013. “Organizing Prisons Through Public-Private Partnerships: A Cross-Country Investigation,” 10 Brazilian Administration Review 100–120.10.1590/S1807-76922012005000010Search in Google Scholar

Coviello, D., and M. Mario Mariniello. 2012. Publicity Requirements in Public Procurement: Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Design,” Working Paper.10.1016/j.jpubeco.2013.10.008Search in Google Scholar

Coviello, D., L. Moretti, G. Spagnolo, and P. Valbonesi. 2013. “Court Efficiency and Procurement Performance,” Working Paper.10.2139/ssrn.2468867Search in Google Scholar

Demsetz, H. 1968. “Why Regulate Utilities?,” 11 Journal of Law and Economics 55–66.10.1086/466643Search in Google Scholar

Dijkgraaf, E., and R. Gradus. 2004. “Cost Savings of Contracting Out Refuse Collection,” Technical Report, EconWPA.10.1007/978-1-4020-8711-0_2Search in Google Scholar

Domberger, S., C. Hall, and M. Jeffries. 1995. Competitive Tendering and Contracting in Commonwealth Government Agencies: The 1995 Survey Findings. Australia: CTC Research Team, Graduate School of Business, University of Sydney.Search in Google Scholar

Domberger, S., C. Hall, and V. Skinner. 2004. Contracting of Services in the Western Australian Public Sector: The 1995 Survey Findings. Australia: CTC Research Team, Graduate School of Business, University of Sydney.Search in Google Scholar

Domberger, S., and P. Jensen. 1997. “Gaining from Outsourcing,” 4 New Economy 159–163.10.1111/j.1468-0041.1997.tb00195.xSearch in Google Scholar

Domberger, S., P. Jensen, and R. Stonecash. 2002. “Examining the Magnitude and Sources of Cost Savings Associated with Outsourcing,” 26 Public Performance and Management Review 148–168.10.1177/1530957602238260Search in Google Scholar

Domberger, S., S. Meadowcroft, and D.J. Thompson. 1986. “Competitive Tendering and Efficiency: The Case of Refuse Collection,” 7 Fiscal Studies 69–87.10.1111/j.1475-5890.1986.tb00530.xSearch in Google Scholar

Dye, R.A. 1985. “Costly Contract Contingencies,” 26 International Economic Review 233–250.10.2307/2526538Search in Google Scholar

European Commission. 2004. Directive 2004/18/Ec of the European Parliament and of the Council.Search in Google Scholar

European Commission. 2011. Impact and Effectiveness of EU Public Procurement legislation, Evaluation report, part 1.Search in Google Scholar

Evatt Research Centre. 1990. Breach of Contract: Privatization and the Management of Australian Local Government. Sydney: Pluto Press.Search in Google Scholar

Girth, A.M. 2012. “A Closer Look at Contract Accountability: Exploring the Determinants of Sanctions for Unsatisfactory Contract Performance,” 24 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 317–348.10.1093/jopart/mus033Search in Google Scholar

Grossman, S.J., and O. Hart. 1986. “The Cost and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration,” 94 Journal of Political Economy 691–719.10.1086/261404Search in Google Scholar

Hartley, K., and M. Huby. 1986. “Contracting Out Policy: Theory and Evidence,” in J. Kay, C. Mayer and D. Thompson, eds. Privatization and Regulation: The UK Experience. UK: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Heckman, J.J. 1979. “Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error,” 47 Econometrica 153–162.10.2307/1912352Search in Google Scholar

Holmström, B. 1979. “Moral Hazard and Observability,” 10 The Bell Journal of Economics 74–91.10.2307/3003320Search in Google Scholar

Hong, H., and M. Shum. 2002. “Increasing Competition and the Winner’s Curse: Evidence from Procurement,” 69 Review of Economic Studies 871–898.10.1111/1467-937X.00229Search in Google Scholar

Jensen, M., and W. Meckling. 1976. “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure,” 3 Journal of Financial Economics 305–360.10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-XSearch in Google Scholar

Jensen, P.H., and R.E. Stonecash. 2005. “Incentives and the Efficiency of Public Sector-Outsourcing Contracts,” 19 Journal of Economic Surveys 767–787.10.1111/j.0950-0804.2005.00267.xSearch in Google Scholar

Kézdi, G. 2004. “Robust Standard Error Estimation in Fixed-Effects Panel Models,” Hungarian Statistical Review, Special number 9.10.2139/ssrn.596988Search in Google Scholar

Kvaløy, O., and T. Olsen. 2009. “Endogenous Verifiability and Relational Contracting,” 99 American Economic Review 2193–2208.10.1257/aer.99.5.2193Search in Google Scholar

Kvaløy, O., and T.E. Olsen. 2016. “Incentive Provision When Contracting Is Costly,” 83 Economica 741–767.10.1111/ecca.12179Search in Google Scholar

Milne, R.G., and R.E. Wright. 2004. “Competition and Costs: Evidence from Competitive Tendering in the Scottish National Health Service,” 51 Scottish Journal of Political Economy 1–23.10.1111/j.0036-9292.2004.05101001.xSearch in Google Scholar

Savas, E.S. 1977. “An Empirical Study of Competition in Municipal Service Delivery,” 37 Public Administration Review 717–724.10.2307/975342Search in Google Scholar

Spagnolo, G. 2012. “Reputation, Competition, and Entry in Procurement,” 30 International Journal of Industrial Organization 291–296.10.1016/j.ijindorg.2012.01.001Search in Google Scholar

Townsend, R.M. 1979. “Optimal Contracts and Competitive Markets with Costly State Verification,” 21 Journal of Economic Theory 265–293.10.1016/0022-0531(79)90031-0Search in Google Scholar

Wooldridge, J.M. 2001. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, Volume 1. MA: The MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2017-5-24

© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 30.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/rle-2014-0053/html
Scroll to top button