CONTROL RIGHTS IN COMPLEX PARTNERSHIPS

This paper develops a theory of the allocation of authority between two players who are in a complex partnership, that is, a partnership which produces impure public goods. We show that the optimal allocation depends on technological factors, the parties’ valuations of the goods produced, and the degree of impurity of these goods. When the degree of impurity is large, control rights should be given to the main investor, irrespective of preference considerations. There are some situations in which this allocation is optimal even if the degree of impurity is very low as long as one party’s investment is more important than the other party’s. If the parties’ investments are of similar importance and the degree of impurity is large, shared authority is optimal with a greater share going to the low‐valuation party. If the importance of the parties’ investments is similar but the degree of impurity is neither large nor small, the low‐valuation party should receive sole authority. We analyze an extension in which side payments are infeasible. We check for robustness of our results in several dimensions, such as allowing for multiple parties or for joint authority, and apply our results to interpret a number of complex partnerships, including those involving schools and child custody.     

The Time Structure of Self‐Enforcing Agreements

A principal and an agent enter into a sequence of agreements. The principal faces an interim participation constraint at each date, but can commit to the current agreement; in contrast, the agent has the opportunity to renege on the current agreement. We study the time structure of agreement sequences that satisfy participation and no‐deviation constraints and are (constrained) efficient. We show that every such sequence must, after a finite number of dates, exhibit a continuation that maximizes the agent's payoff over all such efficient, self‐enforcing sequences. Additional results are provided for situations with transferable payoffs.     

The Impact of Information Sharing on Supply Chain Performance under Asymmetric Information

The use of screening contracts is a common approach to solve supply chain coordination problems under asymmetric information. One main assumption in this context is that managers without specific incentives would rather use their private information strategically than reveal it truthfully. This harms supply chain performance. This study investigates the impact of information sharing in a principal‐agent setting that is typical for many supply chain transactions. We conduct a laboratory experiment to test whether information sharing has an influence on supply chain coordination. We find that information sharing within the supply chain has two positive effects. First, information sharing reduces the inefficiencies resulting from information deficits if there is a certain amount of trust in the supply chain. Second, communication can limit out‐of‐equilibrium behavior with a small impact on the firm's own payoff, but a large impact on the supply chain partner. Furthermore, we find that both effects are amplified when communication takes place in an environment that allows the less informed supply chain party to punish or to reward the better informed party. Although our extended mechanisms substantially enhance the poor performance of the theoretically optimal coordination contract menu, we find no mechanism that implements supply chain performance superior to the theoretically predicted second‐best level.     

JEEA‐FBBVA Lecture 2012: USE AND ABUSE OF AUTHORITY: A BEHAVIORAL FOUNDATION OF THE EMPLOYMENT RELATION

Employment contracts give a principal the authority to decide flexibly which task his agent should execute. However, there is a tradeoff, first pointed out by Simon (1951, Econometrica, 19, 293–302), between flexibility and employer moral hazard. An employment contract allows the principal to adjust the task quickly to the realization of the state of the world, but he may also abuse this flexibility to exploit the agent. We capture this tradeoff in an experimental design and show that principals exhibit a strong preference for the employment contract. However, selfish principals exploit agents in one‐shot interactions, inducing the latter to resist entering into employment contracts. This resistance to employment contracts vanishes if fairness preferences in combination with reputation opportunities keep principals from abusing their power, leading to the widespread, endogenous formation of efficient long‐run employment relations. Our results inform the theory of the firm by showing how behavioral forces shape an important transaction cost of integration—the abuse of authority—and by providing an empirical basis for assessing differences between the Marxian and the Coasian view of the firm, as well as Alchian and Demsetz's (1972, American Economic Review, 62, 777–795) critique of the Coasian approach.     

基于非对称信息理论的第三方物流合作博弈分析

假定在物流外包过程中,第三方物流服务提供商的运作能力与努力水平双因素均为非对称信息,在此基础上,建立第三方物流服务需求方(委托人)与提供商(代理人)之间的合作博弈模型;接着利用最大值原理求解得出博弈双方的合作策略;最后,在代理人为风险中性的假设下,进一步分析了物流外包方的风险成本、激励成本和总代理成本。     

Progressive Learning

We study a dynamic principal–agent relationship with adverse selection and limited commitment. We show that when the relationship is subject to productivity shocks, the principal may be able to improve her value over time by progressively learning the agent's private information. She may even achieve her first‐best payoff in the long run. The relationship may also exhibit path dependence, with early shocks determining the principal's long‐run value. These findings contrast sharply with the results of the ratchet effect literature, in which the principal persistently obtains low payoffs, giving up substantial informational rents to the agent.     

THE CONCEPT AND MEASUREMENT OF CENTRALITY–AN INFORMATION APPROACH

The complexity of interdependent structural systems greatly complicates the analysis of any single structure. This is particularly the case when a structure represents some behavioral process. For this reason it is necessary to devise measures which can differentiate qualitatively and quantitatively between structures as well as between subsets (or points) of a particular structure. For example, consider the authority structures of two different organizations. They exhibit similarities and differences which a behavioral analyst tries to identify and explain. Typically, both similarities and differences are compared by structural indices which, on the basis of past data and prior information, tend to reflect certain organizational traits. The purpose of this paper is to investigate one particularly important index—centrality. Centrality conveys the notion that points in a structure are not all ‘equal’. This ‘inequality’ vis-a-vis the structure creates a situation in which certain points will be more ‘central’ than others. In this paper we first identify the characteristics of centrality and observe how they may relate to behavioral research. We then develop a procedure for measuring centrality which is based on information theory.     

Information systems outsourcing projects as a double moral hazard problem

In the past two decades many organizations have turned to other organizations to satisfy their information systems needs. Information systems outsourcing arrangements cover the spectrum from agreements involving the delivery of all information services to those providing specific services such as systems development, communications management, desktop computing provision and maintenance, and so on.In this paper we model information systems outsourcing arrangements as a non-cooperative game with two players: a company and an outsourcing vendor. The game between the two players has an inherent double moral hazard problem as the success of the information system outsourcing project depends on the actions of both players, which are costly for them and are not directly contractible. Both parties make their decisions taking into account the effects that these decisions have on the other player's actions. In our analysis, we compare the solution obtained without a moral hazard problem (the first-best solution) to the one obtained under a double moral hazard setting (the second-best solution). We demonstrate some results based on the assumption that increases in the productivity of the vendor lead to increases in the productivity of the company. Further we establish that outsourcing contracts should provide no separate payment for failure to the outsourcing vendor although effectively many of them do. We also provide a sharing rule for providing appropriate incentives for the vendor and examine the dynamics associated with this sharing rule. Finally, we further provide for the characterization of response functions and the ensuing Nash solution including the optimal outsourcing fee. This allows for the nuanced consideration of the degree of interaction between the effort of one party and the productivity of the effort of the other party. This particular interaction has not been explored formally in the extant research literature.     

The Manufacturer's Incentive to Reduce Lead Times

Although, ceteris paribus, reducing lead times may be desirable from an overall system perspective, an upstream party (e.g., a manufacturer) may have strong disincentives to offer shorter lead times, even if this came at no cost. We consider a setting in which the downstream party has the ability to exert a costly effort to increase demand (e.g., through sales promotions, advertising, etc.) during the selling season, and compare two situations: one where there is zero lead time (i.e., all demand can be satisfied after observing the demand realization), and one where orders need to be made before demand is realized. We identify two interacting effects that may inhibit shorter lead times. A so‐called “safety stock effect” can be observed when a lower risk of stocking out under short lead times induces the downstream party to alter her order quantity. A second effect, termed as “effort effect,” arises if shorter lead times impact the downstream party's optimal sales effort, and, as a consequence, lead to different order quantities. We provide a formal characterization of both effects, insight into how these effects interact, and show under which conditions the manufacturer has an incentive to offer shorter lead times.     

委托代理框架下项目投资的最优合同设计

在不确定的市场环境下,企业的投资机会具有期权特点。本文在委托代理框架下,研究实物期权投资中的最优合同设计问题。考虑一个委托代理制的企业,委托人拥有推迟项目投资的期权,授予代理人执行该投资期权。信息不对称下,代理人有隐藏信息转移现金流的动机。为了实现自身利益的最大化,委托人设计合同,在该合同下,代理人将揭示真实的信息。在信息对称与信息不对称的情形下,分别建立实物期权模型,得到了委托人设计的最优合同。并通过数值分析,得到了如下的主要结论,信息不对称下,与信息对称相比,高成本的项目投资时机推迟,低成本的项目时机提前,投资期权价值减少。委托人的期权价值随着审核效率的提高而增大。当代理人越没有耐心时,委托人的期权价值越大。本文的研究为现实中的委托代理框架下的实物期权投资决策提供了一定的指导意义。     

逆向选择下信息系统的选择标准

逆向选择情形下,代理人拥有的私人信息对委托人与代理人博弈的均衡结果有着至关重要的影响.实际上,逆向选择过程中委托人面临的问题可分为两个阶段:一是对信息系统的选择,二是在给定信息系统下的机制设计问题.现有文献往往关注后一阶段信息系统既定情况下的机制设计问题,本文研究的是第一阶段信息系统的选择标准.在代理人效用函数特定的基础上,当代理人能力的分布函数G(y)一阶随机占优于分布函数F(y),委托人相对于信息系统G(y)更偏好于信息系统F(y),即一阶随机占优(FSD)是逆向选择情形下信息系统占优的充分条件.     

A Model of Delegated Project Choice

We present a model in which a principal delegates the choice of project to an agent with different preferences. The principal determines the set of projects from which the agent may choose. The principal can verify the characteristics of the project chosen by the agent, but does not know which other projects were available to the agent. We consider situations where the collection of available projects is exogenous to the agent but uncertain, where the agent must invest effort to discover a project, where the principal can pay the agent to choose a desirable project, and where the principal can adopt more complex schemes than simple permission sets.     

A Cooperative Savings Game Approach to a Time Sensitive Capacity Allocation and Scheduling Problem

We consider a competitive scheduling setting with arbitrary number of agents each having the option to utilize two parallel resources to satisfy its demand: (i) an in‐house resource dedicated to process only the tasks of each specific agent, and (ii) a flexible resource capable of processing all agents' workloads. In a noncooperative setting, each agent would determine how much of its demand it will subcontract to the flexible resource with the objective to deliver its entire demand as quickly as possible subject to the priority rules set by the owner of the flexible resource (i.e., third‐party). In this study, we also allow for agents to coalesce with other agents and update their initial subcontracting decisions to attain rescheduling savings. Evidently, a grand coalition of all agents can coordinate to achieve the maximum savings possible, but the resulting schedule may yield individual losses for a subset of agents (which we refer to as “losers”), thus necessitating a transfer payment scheme to distribute the rescheduling savings among the agents in an equitable way. We model the rescheduling interactions among the agents as a cooperative savings game, and propose savings distribution schemes that invoke the core allocation concept.     

Regionales Clustering im Aussch��ttungsverhalten von Sparkassen

A significant part of German savings banks does not pay out dividends when they are legally possible. Previous studies show that the conservative payout policy is related to the capitalization and the size of a savings bank and the financial standing of its local authority. This study reports evidence for a regional clustering in addition to the known economic determinants. Our result suggests that savings banks are more prone to paying dividends when the neighboring banks do the same. We hypothesize this clustering to be caused by a multi-stage principal agent relationship in German savings banks. One consequence of this structure is that the representatives of the local authority in the savings bank??s governing board will typically advocate higher dividends than the management. However, they cannot bring to bear their dividend recommendation because they have an information disadvantage with respect to the bank??s management. In such a situation, it is but natural to use the payout policy of neighboring savings banks as a reference point. We propose a test of this hypothesis based on data for all German savings banks in 2005 and 2006. In Probit and (modified) Tobit regressions, our distance measure turns out to be by far the most important determinant of the probability and size of dividend payouts.     

非对称信息条件下业务外包的质量评价和转移支付决策

研究了不同信息条件下业务外包的产品质量评价问题,在文献[l,2]基础上考虑购买商作为委托人和供应商作为代理人建立了业务外包的委托代理模型。其中,质量预防水平为供应商的决策变量,购买商对供应商的转移支付和质量评价水平为购买商的决策变量。本文考虑了供应商质量预防信息隐匿情况,重点研究了非对称信息下业务外包的质量评价和转移支付问题,运用极大值原理推导了购买商的质量评价和转移支付的最优解。最后结合一个农机公司拖拉机生产业务外包问题进行了仿真计算和分析,对比了不同信息环境下的决策结果。     

成本控制、棘轮效应与最优激励契约

国企总部（委托人）授权生产单元（代理人）进行的成本控制通常在不对称信息下实施，不对称信息导致激励方案的使用。随着时间的推移，委托人将代理人成本控制绩效提供的信息考虑进去修订方案，促使后者以低努力来避免未来更严格的方案，棘轮效应出现。本文探讨无跨期承诺合理假设下的这一现象，研究发现，为最大化效用，实现分离均衡的激励方案更为理想。最优值处，分离均衡状态下，信息租金和努力程度得到较好的权衡，而准分离均衡或混同均衡，棘轮效应产生了比静态模型中更强的激励。委托人需要支付高额租金诱使代理人揭示其真实类型，但国企实施的"限薪令"可能会阻止这一行为，从而无法实现分离均衡。     

No‐Betting‐Pareto Dominance

We argue that the notion of Pareto dominance is not as compelling in the presence of uncertainty as it is under certainty. In particular, voluntary trade based on differences in tastes is commonly accepted as desirable, because tastes cannot be wrong. By contrast, voluntary trade based on incompatible beliefs may indicate that at least one agent entertains mistaken beliefs. We propose and characterize a weaker, No‐Betting, notion of Pareto domination which requires, on top of unanimity of preference, the existence of shared beliefs that can rationalize such preference for each agent.     

复杂不确定环境下考虑代理人通过努力减少项目持续期限的最优代理合同

本文着重研究复杂不确定环境下如何设计最优合同,以激励代理人减少项目持续期限。在代理问题中,以往的数量研究大多使用随机变量刻画项目参数和代理人的努力程度。但是,在某些情况下,项目参数和代理人的努力程度不能被历史数据获得,而必须由专家进行估计。运用不确定变量刻画专家对这些参数的估计,并且证明这样做是合理的。通过应用不确定理论,提出复杂不确定环境下考虑代理人通过努力减少项目持续期限的最优代理合同模型。之后,为了解决这个问题,给出了该模型的确定性形式。此外,对是否考虑代理人不确定努力的最优合同进行了比较。结果显示,当其他条件相同时,委托人在考虑代理人不确定努力程度的合同中得到的期望收益不低于在没有考虑代理人不确定努力程度的合同中到的期望收益。最后,为了更好地展示模型的应用,给出了一个数值例子并进行了相关讨论。     

Games Played Through Agents

We introduce a game of complete information with multiple principals and multiple common agents. Each agent makes a decision that can affect the payoffs of all principals. Each principal offers monetary transfers to each agent conditional on the action taken by the agent. We characterize pure‐strategy equilibria and we provide conditions—in terms of game balancedness—for the existence of an equilibrium with an efficient outcome. Games played through agents display a type of strategic inefficiency that is absent when either there is a unique principal or there is a unique agent.     

Agency Problems and Airport Security: Quantitative and Qualitative Evidence on the Impact of Security Training

We analyze the issue of agency costs in aviation security by combining results from a quantitative economic model with a qualitative study based on semi‐structured interviews. Our model extends previous principal‐agent models by combining the traditional fixed and varying monetary responses to physical and cognitive effort with nonmonetary welfare and potentially transferable value of employees' own human capital. To provide empirical evidence for the tradeoffs identified in the quantitative model, we have undertaken an extensive interview process with regulators, airport managers, security personnel, and those tasked with training security personnel from an airport operating in a relatively high‐risk state, Turkey. Our results indicate that the effectiveness of additional training depends on the mix of “transferable skills” and “emotional” buy‐in of the security agents. Principals need to identify on which side of a critical tipping point their agents are to ensure that additional training, with attached expectations of the burden of work, aligns the incentives of employees with the principals' own objectives.