Multistage Contracting with Applications to R&D and Insurance Policies

An agent undertakes a nonobservable first‐stage effort. The principal observes whether the effort results in a successful project or not. If the project succeeds, only the firm observes its interim quality, and can further improve it with a nonobservable second‐stage effort. If the agent accepts penalties when the first‐stage fails, moral hazard and asymmetric information do not prevent the principal from implementing her first‐best outcome. However, if the agent is bounded by the maximum loss he can bear when the first‐stage fails (limited liability), the principal induces the agent to exert a first‐stage effort below the first‐best level and a second‐stage effort above the first‐best level when the interim quality of his project is low. This distortion in efforts implies that the ex post rent left to the agent with a project of high interim quality is above the first‐best level. This provides a rationale for the optimality of expanding the use of the “carrot” (second‐stage rent) when the use of the “stick” (first‐stage penalty) is restricted. Implications of the theory for R&D, bank, job, and insurance contracts are discussed.     

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.     

Organizational Cultures of Corruption

Systematic differences in the incidence of corruption between countries can be explained by models of coordination failure that suggest that corruption can only be reduced by a “big push” across an entire economy. However, there is significant evidence that corruption is often sustained as an organizational culture, and can be combated with targeted effort in individual organizations one at a time. In this paper, we propose a model that reconciles these two theories of corruption. We explore a model of corruption with two principal elements. First, agents suffer a moral cost if their corruption behavior diverges from the level they perceive to be the social norm; second, the perception of the norm is imperfect; it gives more weight to the behavior of colleagues with whom the agent interacts regularly. This leads to the possibility that different organizations within the same country may stabilize at widely different levels of corruption. Furthermore, the level of corruption in an organization is persistent, implying that some organizations may have established internal “cultures” of corruption. The organizational foci are determined primarily by the opportunities and (moral) costs of corruption. Depending on the values of these parameters, the degree of corruption across departments may be relatively uniform or widely dispersed. These results also explain another surprising empirical observation: that in different countries similar government departments such as tax and education rank very differently relative to each other in the extent to which they are corrupt. This is difficult to explain in incentive‐based models if similar departments face similar incentives in different countries.     

You Don't Always Get What You Pay For: Bonuses,Perceived Income and Effort

Abstract. Consider a principal–agent relationship in which more effort by the agent raises the likelihood of success. This paper provides conditions such that no success bonus induces the agent to exert more effort and the optimal contract is independent of success. Moreover, success bonuses may even reduce effort and thus the probability of success. The reason is that bonuses increase the perceived income of the agent and can hence reduce his willingness to exert effort. This perceived income effect has to be weighed against the incentive effect of the bonus. The tradeoff is determined by the marginal effect of effort on the success probability in relation to this probability itself (success hazard‐rate of effort). The paper also discusses practical implications of the finding.     

Fairness and Incentives in a Multi‐task Principal–Agent Model

This paper reports on a two‐task principal–agent experiment in which only one task is contractible. The principal can either offer a piece‐rate contract or a (voluntary) bonus to the agent. Bonus contracts strongly outperform piece‐rate contracts. Many principals reward high effort on both tasks with substantial bonuses. Agents anticipate this and provide high effort on both tasks. In contrast, almost all agents with a piece‐rate contract focus on the first task and disregard the second. Principals understand this and predominantly offer bonus contracts. This behavior contradicts the self‐interest theory but is consistent with theories of fairness.     

Simultaneous versus sequential knowledge transfer in an organization

This paper studies an organizational knowledge sharing process which requires costly “teaching” and “learning” efforts on the part of the sender and receiver, respectively. The process is a team problem in which the principal rewards successful sharing by optimally rewarding performance. In this setting we compare two modes of knowledge transfer with regard to efficiency. The first is sequential in which the sender precommits to teaching and the receiver acts as a follower. The second is simultaneous where each agent simultaneously exerts effort. A key result is that the sequential mode dominates when teaching and learning are complements, but the simultaneous mode dominates if teaching and learning are substitutes.     

EMERGENCE OF LEADERSHIP IN TEAMS*

This paper provides a simple model to explain the emergence of leadership in an unstructured team. Each agent has partial information about the productivity of the team. Each agent may invest a productive effort in one of two periods. If one agent voluntarily moves first and the other waits for the second period, and if the first‐move action successfully transmits his type, the first mover effectively exercises leadership in affecting the effort choice of the second mover. We prove that, if each agent holds stochastically independent information, leadership emerges with positive probabilities in Cho–Kreps stable outcomes.     

Why it Pays to Conceal: On the Optimal Timing of Acquiring Verifiable Information

Abstract. We consider optimal contracts when a principal has two sources to detect bad projects. The first one is an information technology without agency costs (IT_P), whereas the second one is the expertise of an agent subject to moral hazard, adverse selection and limited liability (IT_A). First, we show that the principal does not necessarily benefit from access to additional information and thereby may prefer to ignore it. Second, we discuss different timings of information release, i.e., a disclosure contract offered to the agent after the principal announced the result of IT_P , and a concealment contract where the agent exerts effort before IT_P is checked. We find that concealment is superior whenever the quality of IT_P is sufficiently low. Then, IT_P is almost worthless under a disclosure contract, while it can still be exploited to reduce the agent's information rent under concealment. If the quality of IT_P improves, disclosure can be superior as it allows to adjust the agent's effort to the updated expected quality of the project. However, even for a highly informative IT_P , concealment can be superior as it mitigates the adverse selection problem.     

The Trojan-Horse Principle in Development Assistance: A Reading of Uganda's Experience with Aid

The World Bank recommends “ideas, not money” as a guiding principle to donors for dealing with badly governed countries. This paper challenges that principle on the basis of a study of the evolution in Uganda of pro‐growth policies in the early to mid 1990s and pro‐poor policies in the late 1990s. The analysis of Uganda’s experience with aid is accommodated within the theoretical framework of a principal–agent conditionality game, in which policy objectives of the recipient (the agent) evolve over time. The key finding of the paper is that the apparent conditionality failure of the period 1987–91 has paved the way for later reform. Financial aid given during this period suspended the necessity of reforms and bought donor proximity to recipient policy deliberations, as a result of both of which the policy learning could take place that led to later successful reform measures.     

Signaling quality with increased incentives

Previous work on informed-principal problems with moral hazard suggested that the principal should signal project quality by retaining a larger share of the project and hence lowering incentives for the agent. We show that this view is incomplete. If project quality and effort are complements and effort is more valuable for high-quality projects, a principal with a high-quality project may separate from a principal with a low-quality project by increasing incentives for the agent. This holds with a risk-neutral agent who is protected by limited liability as well as with a risk-averse agent and unlimited liability. A dynamic version of our model in which the agent learns project quality in later periods provides an explanation for the use of initially reduced royalty rates in business-format franchising contracts.     

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.     

Pessimistic information gathering

An agent gathers information on productivity shocks and accordingly produces on behalf of a principal. Information gathering is imperfect and whether it succeeds or not depends on the agent's effort. Contracting frictions come from the fact that the agent is pessimistic on the issue of information gathering, and there are both moral hazard in information gathering, private information on productivity shocks and moral hazard on operating effort. An optimal menu of linear contracts mixes high-powered, productivity-dependent screening options following “good news” with a fixed low-powered option otherwise.     

Reputation from nested activities

Principals usually try to elicit the quality and behavior of agents from their performance. While sometimes success or failure in production does not provide accurate information about the agents, there may be activities not directly related to production that constitute a more precise signal. I show that, when agents face reputation concerns, introducing these activities after a success improves efficiency, while introducing them after a failure reduces efficiency. Hence, nesting activities in the right way may offer a cheap toolbox to provide incentives. As an illustration, I consider a model where reputation concerns drive the hiring decisions of managers in a firm and I show how scapegoating, an activity “nested” after failures in production, generates inefficiencies. While hiring efficient workers increases the probability of success, hiring less efficient workers provides a buffer against reputation loses from failures, since managers can blame them more easily.     

Present-biased preferences,self-awareness and shirking

We model a mechanism design problem in which the principal owns a project that requires work effort by an agent, but agents may have time-inconsistent, present-biased preferences and lack complete self-awareness of these preferences. The self-control problem and naïveté of an agent may lead him to agree to a contract but later shirk or slack-off, even though doing so is observable. When the principal cannot severely punish shirking and agents are completely naïve, the second-best solution entails allowing a present-biased agent to slack-off in order to avoid a greater loss due to shirking. With greater self-awareness among present-biased agents, the principal may do better by screening some from accepting the contract. Furthermore, when shirking can be severely punished, this does not lead to contracts that eliminate effects of the self control problem. Instead the principal may exploit present-biased agents by offering a contract that allows them to slack-off (which agents fail to foresee they will choose to do) but at the expense of foregoing much compensation.     

对美国“新经济”的考察与研究

“新经济”(NewEconomy)概念 ,在美国兴起 ,随后迅即在世界范围内广泛传播与使用。在中国 ,“新经济”一词也正在被越来越多地使用起来。本文通过赴美考察 ,探讨究竟什么是“新经济” ?全文分为三个部分 :第一部分探讨“新经济”概念在美国提出时的宏观大背景 ;第二部分探讨美国不同业界对“新经济”的不同理解和看法 ;第三部分探讨当前以信息技术革命为主的“新经济”究竟“新”在哪里。     

新制度经济学委托代理理论视野的拓展*

新制度经济学中的委托代理理论基于“经济人理性”假定,设计出了精密、精巧、精致的委托代理制度,有效化解了现代企业中委托人与代理人之间利益冲突并提升了企业运营效率。然而,现代企业实践已经证明,即使委托代理制度十分精密、精巧、精致,仍然没有彻底解决委托人与代理人之间的利益冲突和企业运营效率进一步提升问题。因此,必须拓展既有理论视野,从“经济人理性”假定拓展到“经济人+社会人+家庭人复合理性”假定,这样就能够实现委托代理理论视野的拓展。运用新制度经济学研究方法和双边对称信任数理模型表明：基于委托代理制度,进一步强化委托人与代理人之间双边对称信任度,可以进一步化解他们之间的利益冲突并且改善企业运营效率。基于这一结论,强化委托人与代理人之间双边对称信任度的具体路径是优化社会信任环境系统。     

Innovation and knowledge sharing in crowdfunding: how social dynamics affect project success

The aim of this study is to contribute to the existing literature on innovation and knowledge sharing in crowdfunding, by exploring the importance of internal social capital, and how the previous failure of a campaign may lead to the success of a second one from the same project creator. Thus, the research question of the study is: how do social dynamics affect project success in a crowdfunding context? The paper reports an illustrative case study which has been promoted on the Kickstarter platform. The authors analysed data, documentation and physical artefacts, especially regarding the network size during the funding period. The results show that the self-learning which project creators gain from previous failure supports them in relaunching their crowdfunding campaign. However, various revisions take place during the second campaign (e.g. social capital size, product redesign and knowledge sharing) to achieve success.     

On the Non-Contractual Nature of Donor–Recipient Interaction in Development Assistance

The author analyzes three issues in strategic donor–recipient interaction motivated by the complexity of the rationale underlying aid. The first is when we have several principals with conflicting objectives. Any one principal cannot offer high powered incentives to the agent to carry out his or her designated task. The second is to do with the fact that effort associated with ensuring aid effectiveness may concern both principal and agent, the optimal solution to which requires cooperative behavior that is difficult to design. Consequently, the contractual type principal–agent relationship between donors and recipients is inappropriate. We need to consider models that signal recipient quality or commitment to reform. Thus, thirdly, a simple model of signaling with commitment problems is presented, along with extensions to multiple types of agent and time periods, as well as possible solutions involving mechanism design.     

Fixed Wages and Bonuses in Agency Contracts: The Case of a Continuous State Space

In this paper, we extend the state‐contingent production approach to principal–agent problems to the case where the state space is an atomless continuum. The approach is modelled on the treatment of optimal tax problems. The central observation is that, under reasonable conditions, the optimal contract may involve a fixed wage with a bonus for above‐normal performance. This is analogous to the phenomenon of “bunching” at the bottom in the optimal tax literature.     

Disentangling managerial incentives from a dynamic perspective: The role of stock grants

We analyse the optimal contract between a risk‐averse manager and the initial shareholders in a two‐period model where the manager's investment effort, carried out in period 1, and his or her current effort, carried out in period 2, both impact the second‐period profit, so that it may be difficult to disentangle the incentives for these two types of effort. We show that stock grants play different roles according to whether the signal of investment effort is less noisy, or noisier, than that of current effort. We determine simultaneously the optimal stock grants and the optimal restrictions on sales of shares.