GRANTING AN EXIT OPTION TO CONDUCT AN AUDIT

We study a principal–agent relationship with auditing in which information from an audit is ‘soft’– by conducting an audit, the principal observes the agent's private information, but cannot obtain verifiable evidence on the information. Moreover, the principal's auditing effort is unverifiable in our model. Therefore, besides the agent's misreporting incentive, there is the principal's incentive to accuse the truthful agent even without auditing. If the principal's auditing effort is verifiable, granting no exit option to the agent is optimal although the principal can still accuse a truthful agent after the audit. We show that when the principal's auditing effort is unverifiable, granting an exit option to the agent and auditing are complementary. Without granting an exit option to the agent, no auditing is optimal, and the principal grants an exit option to conduct a sincere audit, which in turn mitigates the agent's misreporting incentive. Our analysis also reveals that, when the cost of auditing is sufficiently large, the principal conducts more sincere audits with a smaller amount of penalty.     

WHY DOES IT MATTER THAT BELIEFS AND VALUATIONS BE CORRECTLY REPRESENTED?*

This article contains an analysis of a simple principal–agent problem illustrating possible problems that may arise when the prinicpal ascribes to the agent subjective probabilities and utilities that are implied by the subjective expected utility model but do not represent the agent's beliefs and valuations. In particular, it is possible that an incentive contract designed by the principal induces the agent to choose an action that is not in the principal's best interest.     

Discretionary rewards as a feedback mechanism

This paper studies the use of discretionary rewards in a finitely repeated principal–agent relationship with moral hazard. The key aspect is that rewards have informational content. When the principal obtains a private subjective signal about the agent's performance, she may pay discretionary bonuses to provide credible feedback to the agent. In accordance with the often observed compression of ratings, we show that in equilibrium the principal communicates the agent's interim performance imperfectly, i.e., she does not fully differentiate good and bad performance. Furthermore, we show that small rewards can have a large impact on the agent's effort, provided that the principal's stake in the project is small.     

Choosing the agent's group identity in a trust game with delegated decision making

Members of a given social group often favor members of their own group identity over people with different group identities. We construct a trust game in which the principal delegates the decision about an investment into a receiver to an agent who either favors the principal's or the receiver's group identity. When choosing the agent's group identity the principal faces a trade‐off between a loyal agent and an agent who might increase the receiver's willingness to cooperate. We solve for the principal's decision in a subgame‐perfect nash equilibrium for the two scenarios of a risk‐neutral and risk‐averse agent, respectively.     

SHOULD YOU ALLOW YOUR EMPLOYEE TO BECOME YOUR COMPETITOR? ON NONCOMPETE AGREEMENTS IN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS*

We discuss a principal–agent model in which the principal has the opportunity to include a noncompete agreement in the employment contract. We show that not imposing such an agreement can be beneficial for the principal, as the possibility to leave the firm generates implicit incentives for the agent. The principal prefers to impose such a clause if and only if the value created is sufficiently small relative to the agent's outside option. If the principal can use an option contract for retaining the agent, she will never prefer a strict noncompete agreement.     

Optimal investment and consumption with return predictability and execution costs

We provide a closed-form solution to an optimal investment and consumption problem for a constant absolute risk aversion (CARA) agent, who faces execution costs when trading correlated risky assets with return predictability. The optimal investment strategy indicates that the agent should trade gradually toward a dynamic aim portfolio, which is an adjusted Merton portfolio with modifications to account for the persistence of the return-predicting signals and the execution costs. The optimal consumption strategy is quadratic in the return-predicting signals and linear in the agent's wealth. Our numerical studies show that the execution costs diminish the importance of asset return predictability on the agent's optimal investment strategy, thereby confirming the conjecture raised by Liu (2004). In addition, the presence of the intermediate consumption leads to a more aggressive aim portfolio than the case without consumption.     

Conspicuous consumption and generation replacement in a model of perpetual youth

This paper investigates household decisions in an overlapping generations model in which individual utility depends on a weighted average of consumption of one's peers. In contrast to representative agent economies, the consumption externality generally affects savings and growth rates. The effects critically depend on the rate at which labor productivity changes with age. For a high (low) rate, the externality lowers (raises) the steady state propensity to consume out of total wealth. The optimal allocation can be decentralized by a (reverse) unfunded social security system if the rate of labor productivity decline is high (low). In contrast to discrete time OLG models, the optimal steady state capital income tax is zero, in spite of the externality.     

Beneficial collusion in corruption control: The case of nonmonetary penalties

We analyze a corruption model where a principal seeks to control an agent's corruption by supplementing a costless noncollusive outside detector such as the media with a collusive internal supervisor. The principal's objective is to minimize the overall costs, made up of enforcement costs and social costs of corruption. If the penalties on the corrupt agent and a failing supervisor are nonmonetary in nature and yet the two parties can engage in monetary side-transfers, the principal may stand to benefit by allowing supervisor–agent collusion. This benefit may even prompt the principal to actively encourage collusion by hiring a dishonest supervisor in strict preference over an honest supervisor.     

Can Agents Be Better Off with Pay Caps?

A popular way to discipline the managers of companies or banks that got into trouble during the recent financial crisis has been to impose caps on managers' pay. Using a small extension of the standard principal–agent model, we argue that pay caps might serve the opposite purpose, because the agent might be better off with a pay cap. Specifically, we show that, given a fixed effort level to be implemented, the agent's expected utility can be decreasing in an upper bound for the agent's reward. The effect of pay caps on the general structure of optimal incentive contracts is also characterized. While an improvement of contracting information always helps the principal, it might increase or decrease the marginal cost of imposing pay caps.     

Career Concerns,Monetary Incentives and Job Design*

We study optimal incentive contracts when commitments are limited, and agents have multiple tasks and career concerns. The agent's career concerns are determined by the outside market. We show that the principal might want to give the strongest explicit incentives to agents far from retirement to account for the fact that career concerns might induce behavior in conflict with the principal's preferences. Furthermore, we show that maximized welfare might be decreasing in the strength of career concerns, that optimal incentives can be positively correlated with various measures of uncertainty, and that career incentives have strong implications for optimal job design.     

Optimal scrutiny in multi-period promotion tournaments

Consider a principal who hires heterogeneous agents to work for him over T periods, without prior knowledge of their skills, and intends to promote one of them at the end. In each period the agents choose effort levels that influence their outputs, and are fully informed of the past history of outputs. The principal's major objective is to maximize the expected total output, but he may also put some weight on detecting the higher-skilled agent for promotion. To this end, he randomly samples n out of the T periods and promotes the agent who produces more on the sample. This determines an extensive form game Γ(T,n), which we analyze for its subgame perfect equilibria in behavioral strategies. We show that the principal will do best to always choose a small sample size n. More precisely, if η(T) is the maximal optimal sample size, then η(T)/T→0 as T→∞.     

Job design with conflicting tasks reconsidered

A principal wants two sequential tasks to be performed by wealth-constrained agents. Suppose that there is an outcome externality; i.e., a first-stage success can make second-stage effort more or less effective. If the tasks are conflicting, the principal's profit-maximizing way to induce high efforts is to hire one agent to perform both tasks (so that the prospect to get a larger second-stage rent after a first-stage success motivates the agent to work hard in the first stage). In contrast, when there is an effort externality (i.e., first-stage effort reduces or increases the probability of a second-stage success), then the principal prefers to hire two agents whenever the tasks are conflicting.     

Delegation to a possibly ignorant agent

In a delegation problem, an uninformed principal delegates decision‐making powers to a biased and possibly ignorant agent. The principal cannot use monetary payments but can restrict the set of the agent's choices. I show that in the general case, the principal may offer a disconnected set of choices. In a setting with arbitrary bias the uncertainty principle holds—the principal benefits as the likelihood that the agent is informed increases. When the bias is constant, I show that the ally principle holds—the principal benefits as the bias becomes smaller. Finally, when the likelihood of the agent being informed is determined by the agent's effort, then for small biases the principal benefits from limiting the agent's choice. When the agent is sufficiently biased, the principal gives more choice to the agent, so as to to improve incentives for information acquisition.     

Optimal contracting with altruism and reciprocity

Motivated by the recent experimental evidence on altruistic behavior, we study a simple principal–agent model where each player cares about other players' utility, and may reciprocate their attitude towards him. We show that, relative to the selfish benchmark, efficiency improves when players are altruistic. Nevertheless, in contrast to what may be expected, an increase in the degree of the agent's altruism as well as a more reciprocal behavior by players has ambiguous effects on efficiency. We also consider the effects of the presence of spiteful players and discuss how monetary transfers between players depend on their degrees of altruism and spitefulness.     

The value of information in a principal-agent model with moral hazard: The ex post contracting case

In a principal-agent model with moral hazard, a signal about the principal?s technology — the stochastic mapping from the agent?s action to the outcome — is observed before the contract is offered. The signal is either uninformative (null information), informative and observed only by the principal (private information), or also observed by the agent (public information). We show that, from an ex ante standpoint (before the signal is observed): (i) the agent prefers private to both null and public information; (ii) the principal sometimes prefers null to both private and public information; and (iii) when the principal prefers public to null information, she prefers public to private information, whereas the agent prefers private to public information. In this last situation, we also show that (iv) for any separating equilibrium with private information, there exists a contract with public information that both strictly prefer.     

Wealth Inequality and Asset Pricing

In an Arrow–Debreu exchange economy with identical agents except for their initial endowment, we examine how wealth inequality affects the equilibrium level of the equity premium and the risk-free rate. We first show that wealth inequality raises the equity premium if and only if the inverse of absolute risk aversion is concave in wealth. We then show that the equilibrium risk-free rate is reduced by wealth inequality if the inverse of the coefficient of absolute prudence is concave. We also prove that the combination of a small uninsurable background risk with wealth inequality biases asset pricing towards a larger equity premium and a smaller risk-free rate.     

MARKET‐BASED INCENTIVES

In this article, we study market‐induced, external incentives similar to career concerns jointly with standard, contractual incentives linking compensation to performance. We consider a dynamic principal–agent problem in which the agent's outside option is determined endogenously in a competitive labor market. In equilibrium, strong performance increases the agent's market value. When this value becomes sufficiently high, the threat of the agent quitting forces the principal to increase the agent's compensation. The prospect of obtaining this raise gives the agent an incentive to exert effort, which reduces the need for standard incentives. In fact, whenever the agent's option to quit is sufficiently close to being “in the money,” the market‐induced incentive eliminates the need for standard incentives altogether: Compensation becomes completely insensitive to current performance.     

Inequality: The original economic sin of capitalism? An Evaluation of Thomas Piketty's "Capital in the twenty-first century"

This is a review article of Thomas Piketty's book “Capital in the twenty-first century”. Piketty promotes the old theme that, under capitalism, the rich tend to become richer and the poor become poorer, at least in relative terms. We consider whether the data really shows that wealth and income are becoming more concentrated; the role of income transfers (Piketty's data is for pre-tax and pre-transfer income) and other influences on inequality such as real estate prices; the implications of social and economic mobility; the role of the state in fostering inequality; and the determination of socially acceptable inequality. We conclude that Piketty has not succeeded in showing that the inequality r > g (the rate of return is greater than the rate of growth) is the principal determinant of inequality. Piketty offers neither an accompanying theory of social justice nor a theoretical framework to support his case. In particular, lacking is a revealed appreciation of the effects of high marginal tax rates on growth and efficiency.     

The progressivity of equalization payments in federations

We investigate the conditions under which an inequality averse and additively separable welfarist central government would choose to set up a progressive equalization payments scheme in a federation with local public goods. A progressive equalization payments scheme is a list of per capita net (possibly negative) subsidies – one such net subsidy for every jurisdiction – that are decreasing with respect to jurisdictions per capita wealth. We examine this question in a setting where the case for progressivity is a priori the strongest, namely: all citizens have the same utility function, inhabitants of a given jurisdiction have the same wealth and are not able to move across jurisdictions and there is no cross-jurisdiction competition in the setting of tax rates. We show that the central government favors a progressive equalization payments scheme for all distributions of wealth and population sizes if and only if its objective function is additively separable between each jurisdiction's per capita wealth and number of inhabitants. When interpreted for a mean of order r social welfare function, and assuming the absence of congestion in the local public good, this condition is shown to be equivalent to the requirement that the individual indirect utility function be additively separable between wealth public good price and be raised at the power 1/r before its agregation by means of the mean-of-order r social welfare function. Some implications of this restriction to the case where the individual's direct utility function is additively separable are also derived.     

ENDOGENOUS PUNISHMENTS IN AGENCY WITH VERIFIABLE EX POST INFORMATION*

The article studies an adverse selection model in which a contractible, imperfect signal on the agent's type is revealed ex post. The agent is wealth constrained, which implies that the maximum penalty depends on the contracted transaction (e.g., the volume of trade). First, we show that the qualitative effects of the signal can be unambiguously tied to the nature of the problem (e.g., whether the agent is in a “buyer” or a “seller” position). Second, the distortions caused by informational asymmetries may become more severe although more information is now available. Finally, the signal can actually serve to increase the agent's informational rents.