Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 724

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Role of Surge Pricing on a Service Platform with Self-Scheduling Capacity

Cachon, Gérard P., Daniels, Kaitlin M., Lobel, Ruben·2017·Manufacturing & Service Operations Management

Abstract

Recent platforms, like Uber and Lyft, offer service to consumers via “self-scheduling” providers who decide for themselves how often to work. These platforms may charge consumers prices and pay providers wages that both adjust based on prevailing demand conditions. For example, Uber uses a “surge pricing” policy, which pays providers a fixed commission of its dynamic price. With a stylized model that yields analytical and numerical results, we study several pricing schemes that could be implemented on a service platform, including surge pricing. We find that the optimal contract substantially increases the platform’s profit relative to contracts that have a fixed price or fixed wage (or both), and although surge pricing is not optimal, it generally achieves nearly the optimal profit. Despite its merits for the platform, surge pricing has been criticized because of concerns for the welfare of providers and consumers. In our model, as labor becomes more expensive, providers and consumers are better off with surge pricing because providers are better utilized and consumers benefit both from lower prices during normal demand and expanded access to service during peak demand. We conclude, in contrast to popular criticism, that all stakeholders can benefit from the use of surge pricing on a platform with self-scheduling capacity. The e-companion is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2017.0618 .

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/msom.2017.0618

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. 10.1287/mnsc.1120.1533 · DOI
  2. 10.1287/opre.1080.0608 · DOI
  3. Banerjee S, Riquelme C, Johari R (2015) Pricing in ride-sharing platforms: A queueing-theoretic approach. Working paper, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. · DOI
  4. 10.1287/mnsc.1040.0218 · DOI
  5. 10.1287/mnsc.1040.0215 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1287/mnsc.1070.0836 · DOI
  7. Chen MK, Sheldon M (2017) Dynamic pricing in a labor market: Surge pricing and flexible work on the Uber platform. Working paper, University of California, Los Angeles. · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1287/mnsc.2015.2173 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Cohen P, Robert H, Jonathan H (2016) Using big data to estimate consumer surplus: The case of Uber. Working paper, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1093/qje/qjv026 · DOI
  11. Fraiberger SP, Sundararajan A (2015) Peer-to-peer rental markets in the sharing economy. Working paper, Stern School of Business, New York University, New York. · DOI · Paper page
  12. Gale IL, 1993, Amer. Econom. Rev., 83, 135
  13. Hall JV, Krueger AB (2015) An analysis of the labor market for Uber’s driver-partners in the United States. Working paper, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ. · DOI
  14. Hu M, Zhou Y (2015) Dynamic matching in a two-sided market. Working paper, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario. · DOI
  15. Huet E, 2015, Forbes
  16. Ibrahim R, Arifoglu K (2015) Managing large service systems with self-scheduling agents. Working paper, University College London, London. · DOI
  17. Isaac M, 2015, New York Times
  18. Katz LF, Krueger AB (2016) The rise and nature of alternative work arrangements in the United States, 1995–2005. Working paper, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ. · DOI · Paper page
  19. Kim J, Randhawa RS (2015) Asymptotically optimal dynamic pricing in observable queues. Working paper, University of Southern California, Los Angeles. · DOI
  20. Kosoff M, 2015, Business Insider
  21. 10.1086/673374 · DOI
  22. 10.1287/mnsc.1120.1564 · DOI
  23. 10.2307/2555627 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.1287/isre.2014.0549 · DOI
  25. 10.1111/j.1756-2171.2006.tb00036.x · DOI · Paper page
  26. Scheiber N, 2015, New York Times
  27. 10.1287/mnsc.2013.1785 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.1287/mnsc.49.11.1504.20587 · DOI
  29. Taylor T (2016) On-demand service platforms. Working paper, University of California, Berkeley. · DOI
  30. 10.1287/mksc.2013.0809 · DOI

Cited by

See all 724

Metadata

Authors
Cachon, G. P., Daniels, K. M., & Lobel, R.
Venue
Manufacturing & Service Operations Management
Published
2017-07
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
368-384
ISSN
  • 1523-4614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5498
OpenAlex
W3124950351
Cited by
724
References
4
FWCI
116.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Role of Surge Pricing on a Service Platform with Self-Scheduling Capacity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/msom.2017.0618
The paper
Cachon, G. P., Daniels, K. M., & Lobel, R. (2017). The Role of Surge Pricing on a Service Platform with Self-Scheduling Capacity. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2017.0618

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.