According to section 2.2.1, using Shapely’s value method, profit sharing
was done among members of the diagnostic laboratory network. Table 5
shows the results of profit sharing in a numerical example. In Table 5,
the profit of each laboratory is equal to the weighted average of the
Shapely’s values of laboratories (Table 4). In Table 5, the profit
sharing is represented by both percentages and earnings. We assume that
if the income of this diagnostic network is ten billion Rials throughout
the next year, then it would be possible to predict the profits of
laboratories using the percentage of each laboratory’s profit.
The profit sharing results show that the better the performance of the
labs, the greater the level of satisfaction of patients, because the
accuracy of the test results is an effective factor in the selection of
laboratories by patients. In this case, by increasing the level of
performance of laboratories, the number of samples of these centers has
increased, which has a direct impact on the amount of network income.
Therefore, the collaboration between the laboratories will increase
their efficiency by sharing resources, thus increasing the quality of
the results of the tests of these centers, the number of patients and,
eventually, the sample size of these centers. Table 3 shows the
increasing utility of coalitions with the arrival of a laboratory in
each coalition.
In collaborative networks of various actors, a mechanism based on
equality is often used to profit profit sharing in the network. In
cooperative games, Shapley’s value has the nature of fair profit
sharing. Since the network of medical diagnostics laboratories, through
promotion of cooperation among members, has the properties of a
cooperation network, the Shapely approach helps to predict the fair
profit sharing among network members. The results show that for such a
fair mechanism, the efficiency and sample size, as the two effective
factors, have a decisive role in the share of profit of laboratory units
of the network because in the laboratory services network, members
receive a number of samples according to their performance, which has a
direct impact on net income. In this case, trying to make more money by
network members should be in such a way as to meet the needs of the
network for its lifecycle. Hence, to set up and maintain a diagnostic
network, managers are advised to consider the following: (1) Selected
criteria for profit sharing must be quantitative in nature in order to
be measurable. Therefore, the number of samples and the efficiency, as
two effective factors, can have an effective role in the profit sharing
of network members. (2) Given the lifecycle of the network of the
diagnosis laboratories and the requirements for the network formation
stage, the resources used to share profits should be the requirements
for the establishment of a shared network of diagnostic laboratories.
Therefore, performance evaluation in identifying requirements for
network infrastructure will help to create appropriate infrastructure
for demand and ultimately increase sample size. (3) Since profit sharing
has a strategic property, profit sharing in the network life cycle
should create competitive advantage and provide an incentive for
attracting and investing members from a strategic perspective, which is
also effective in improving member performance and ultimately in
accepting more sample numbers.