Der Artikel Reverse auctions are rarely a cure for ailing businesses in der Zeitschrift "Industrial Distribution" kommt zum Schluss, dass bei Reverse Auctions im Einkauf am Ende alle nur verlieren:

"It's a zero-sum purchasing tool where the buyer gains as a result of the supplier's loss, and that is by design. That doesn't do anything to improve business relationships. Suppliers are forced to drop their prices quickly in a reverse auction, and it all comes out of the supplier's margin. That's going to create hard feelings…Sometimes suppliers look to get even by retaliatory pricing-charging more at a later date. It's the same for all reverse Internet auctions, whether you're talking about purchasing goods or construction services. It's more similar than different. The whole process is oversold and it under-delivers...."

".... reverse auctions encourage bid gaming, a practice in which contractors do not offer their best bids initially so they can first see the bids of other contractors. Bid gaming continues through the process as contractors try to figure how low they have to go—a figure which may never arrive at the actual lowest price.... "

 

Meine These dazu lautet:

Wenn Reverse Auctions diese Effekte haben, dann sind Sie

  • schlecht geplant oder angelegt,
  • schlecht kommuniziert
  • schlecht, zum falschen Zeitpunkt oder mit den falschen Lieferanten durchgeführt
  • oder eine beliebige Kombination davon.

Als letzter Schritt einer Kette, nach Lieferantensuche, Lieferantenqualifizierung und Ausschreibung, sind Auktionen ein taugliches Mittel, über mehr Transparenz den günstigsten unter allen geeigneten Lieferanten (und nur diesen) zu finden.