Common holdings and strategic manager compensation: The case of an asymmetric triopoly

We study an asymmetric triopoly in a heterogeneous product market where quantity decisions are delegated to managers. The two biggest firms are commonly owned by shareholders such as index funds, whereas the smallest firm is owned by independent shareholders. Under such a common holding owner structure, the owners have an incentive to coordinate when designing their manager compensation schemes. This coordination leads to a reallocation of production and induces a redistribution of profits. The trade volume in the market is reduced so that shareholder coordination is detrimental to consumer surplus as well as welfare.     

Firms,shareholders, and financial markets

We study the influence of the financial market on the decisions of firms in the real market. To that end, we present a model in which the shareholders’ portfolio selection of assets and the decisions of the publicly traded firms are integrated through the market process. Financial access alters the objective function of the firms, and the market interaction of shareholders substantially influences firms’ behavior in the real sector. After characterizing the unique equilibrium, we show that the financial sector integrates the preferences of all shareholders into the decisions for production and ownership structure. The participation from investors in the financial market also limits the firms’ ability to manipulate real prices, i.e., there is a loss of market power in the real sector. Note that, while the loss of market power changes expected profits, it is not detrimental to shareholders since the expected return of equity share depends on the variance (and not the mean) of profits. Indeed, any change in expected profits is absorbed by the financial price. We also show that financial access increases production, thereby altering the distribution of profits. In particular, financial access induces firms to take on more risk. Finally, financial access makes the relationship between risk-aversion and risk-taking ambiguous. For example, it is possible that an increase in risk-aversion leads to more risk-taking, i.e., the variance of real profits increases.     

Corporate Social Responsibility and Social Entrepreneurship

Milton Friedman argued that the social responsibility of firms is to maximize profits. This paper examines this argument for the economic environment envisioned by Friedman in which citizens can personally give to social causes and can invest in profit‐maximizing firms and firms that give a portion of their profits to social causes. Citizens obtain social satisfaction from corporate social giving, but corporate giving may not be a perfect substitute for personal giving. The paper presents a theory of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and shows that CSR is costly when it is an imperfect substitute. When investors anticipate the CSR, shareholders do not bear its cost. Instead, the entrepreneurs who form the CSR firms bear the cost. Shareholders bear the cost of CSR only when it is a surprise, and it is to such surprises that Friedman objects. A social entrepreneur is willing to form a CSR firm at a financial loss because either doing so expands the opportunity sets of citizens in consumption‐social giving space or there is an entrepreneurial warm glow from forming the firm. Firms can also undertake strategic CSR activities that increase profits, and a social entrepreneur carries strategic CSR beyond profit maximization and market value maximization. The paper also examines the implications of taxes and the effect of the market for control for the sustainability of CSR.     

Profit sharing regulation and repeated bargaining with a shut-down option

We analyze the behavior of a firm where workers share profits with shareholders by using a model cast in an Aoki framework. There are two sorts of uncertainties: one relates to the market price, assumed to follow a random path in continuous time, while the other concerns internal organization, i.e. the share of profits to be distributed between workers and shareholders. In the institutional setting we adopt the firm is flexible, since it has the possibility of shutting down, by paying laid off workers a bonus, which represents a sunk cost. The distributive share is determined in the firm's internal labor market through a bargaining that takes place at two occasions: at the beginning of the firm's life and when profits reach a threshold level. The second bargaining is endogenized according to a procedure imposed upon shareholders and workers by a regulator who may use profit distribution as a way to intervene in the firm's internal labor market. Specificities make this market highly imperfect. Different share parameter patterns result, owing to a shut down option, according to whether (a) the regulator calls for renegotiation when profits are increasing or decreasing, (b) the regulator's rule is announced in advance or is discretionally set.     

Returns to acquiring firms: The role of managerial ownership, managerial wealth, and outside owners

Since merger and acquisition activity does not unambiguously benefit the shareholders of acquiring firms, the motivation of managers who undertake such actions is unclear. The present study investigates the extent to which the wealth effects of acquisition activity undertaken by firms in one industry—communications and publishing—are related to (1) the ownership and wealth characteristics of both the executives and the board of directors of these firms and (2) the ownership concentration of large outside shareholders. The motivating hypothesis, supported by empirical results, is that these factors contribute to the alignment of executive and shareholder interests.     

South Korean Labor Market Discrimination Against Women: Estimating Its Cost

A bstract . South Korean chaebols (large family owned firms) have extensive government ties which provide them with favorable treatment. In turn, the government obtains support from the chaebols. The chaebols have gained economic or excess profits through exploiting monopolistic power in the domestic South Korean product market and through exploiting monopsonistic power in the domestic factor market.
How a monopsonistic firm obtains excess profits is illustrated and related to the behavior of the chaebols as a whole. Major focus is on the labor market. The chaebols have discretionary power over how to exploit their monopsonistic position. The status of women in the South Korean work force in light of this discretionary power is considered. An estimate of the income loss involved is made.     

Pricing by state‐owned enterprises: the case of postal services

Sappington and Sidak develop a model of state‐owned enterprise (SOE) pricing behavior in which firms maximize a weighted average of revenues and profits. The model predicts that SOEs will lower prices in more‐elastic markets and raise them in less‐elastic markets if the weight they place on profit is positive. The Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 relaxed the institutional constraints on pricing by the US Postal Service, which allows a test of the Sappington–Sidak model. The model's predictions are broadly confirmed. Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act in 2006, which may help address some anticompetitive concerns in this industry. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Government Engagement,Environmental Policy,and Environmental Performance: Evidence from the Most Polluting Chinese Listed Firms

This study empirically examines the implementation of environmental policies and how government engagement impacts on a firm's environmental performance based on a sample of Chinese listed firms in the eight most polluting industries over a 10‐year period. The findings of the study demonstrate that government engagement, measured as ownership structure, is positively correlated with environmental performance, measured by environmental capital expenditure, for state‐owned firms, but no significant relation is found for non‐state‐owned firms. In addition, non‐state‐owned firms are more likely to perform better in terms of environmental investment after the 2006 enactment of a new policy explicitly linking environmental issues with political incentives to regional governments. This study also reports that corporate environmental performance impairs firm value for state‐owned firms but has no impact on firm value for non‐state‐owned firms, suggesting that investors negatively respond to environmental investments made by state‐owned firms as a result of government engagement/political pressure. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.     

Managerial Incentives for Takeovers

The paper studies managerial incentives in a model where managers choose product market strategies and make takeover decisions. The equilibrium contract includes an incentive to increase the firm's sales, under either quantity or price Competition. This result contrasts with previous findings in the literature, and hinges on the fact that when managers are more aggressive, rival firms earn lower profits and thus are willing to sell out at a lower price. However, as a side effect of such a contract, the manager might undertake unprofitable takeovers.     

Rivalry Restraint as Equilibrium Behavior

Rivalry restraint has received a lot of attention as a theory of profits in recent research on business strategy. Its economic rationale is explained as the consequences of either exogenous or endogenous anticompetitive forces present in different industries. In this paper, we use a dynamic oligopolistic industry model and show that rivalry restraint emerges as equilibrium behavior among firm owners who delegate decisions to managers. In the corresponding two‐stage game, managers choose optimal production rates in a dynamic Cournot market and owners set incentives for managers, acting sequentially rational. Equilibrium incentives correspond to rivalry restraint, that is, managers are less aggressive in the product market with lower outputs and increasing profits for all firms in the industry.     

Uncertainty,hiring and firing costs,and the determinants of profit‐sharing rules

We consider a firm run by a manager who acts on behalf of shareholders. The firm produces a commodity whose demand evolves stochastically over time. The firm's employees possess firm‐specific skills and knowledge and thus can bargain over profits with shareholders immediately before the firm hires or fires workers. The firm will distribute more portions of profits to employees when it incurs higher costs to hire or fire workers. In addition, as uncertainty in demand increases, the firm will distribute smaller (larger) portions of profits to employees if the firm does not have the option to fire (hire) workers.     

Evolutionary competition in a mixed market with socially concerned firms

In this paper we study an oligopoly market where profit-maximizing firms and socially concerned firms compete in quantities. Confronting remarks by Milton Friedman and Gary Becker, we are using an evolutionary setting to investigate the endogenous choice of the proper objective of business firms and the influence of product differentiation on the long run survival of firms which pursue non-profit motives. We find that firms which consider a combination of profit and consumer welfare can indeed have larger market shares and profits than their profit-maximizing rivals. One insight is that it might pay off for shareholders to consider stakeholder welfare, but that the level of social concern should not be too high. Based on a strategy׳s profitability, we consider asynchronous evolutionary updating with firms selecting Nash quantities or choosing best replies to the expected market quantity. Here we observe that the consumers׳ willingness to pay a price premium for products is crucial for the long run survival of socially concerned firms. Depending on the degrees of product differentiation and social concern, long run outcomes consist either of both types of firms or only one type of firm. If the firms׳ propensity to switch between a social or a profit-maximizing strategy is sufficiently large, steady states are unstable and even complicated dynamics can occur.     

Viceroys or Emperors? An Institution‐Based Perspective on Merger and Acquisition Prevalence and Shareholder Value

We study how cross‐country variance in institutions that aim to address core agency problems influences consequential strategic decisions of firms around the world. Scholars frequently argue that the interests of minority shareholders are threatened by merger and acquisitions (M&As) due to principal‐agency problems. Rather than acting in shareholders’ best interests, managers potentially act as viceroys, using M&As to cushion themselves from risk and extract more pay. Yet equally salient is the issue of principal‐principal agency, where controlling shareholders can behave as emperors who use M&As to siphon off assets and profits, and appropriate wealth of shareholders with fewer control rights. Taking an institution‐based perspective on these ‘viceroy’ and ‘emperor’ problems, we conjecture that institutions aimed to address these agency problems can generate the desired outcome regarding M&A prevalence, but may also produce unintentional negative consequences for shareholder value as a side‐effect. Empirical evidence covering M&As from 73 countries supports our hypotheses.     

On the impact of managerial bonus systems on firm profit and market competition: the cases of pure profit,sales, market share and relative profits compared

By designing remuneration schemes based on a bonus rewarding specific firm‐level outcomes, the owners/shareholders of a firm can manipulate the behavior of their managers. In practice, different bonus anchors take center stage: some are profit‐based, others use sales as the key yardstick and still different ones focus on relative performance vis‐à‐vis a peer group. In this paper, we focus on the impact of remuneration schemes on firm‐level profitability. The profit effect is investigated for (all possible combinations of) four bonus systems using delegation games. In the context of a linear Cournot model for two or three firms, we model a two‐ or three‐stage decision structure where, in the first stage (or first two stages), an owner decides on the bonus system for his manager and where, in the final stage, the manager takes the daily output decision for her firm. It appears that the bonus system based on relative (profits) performance is superior throughout. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Network effects,trade, and productivity

We consider network effects in the monopolistically competitive model of trade developed by Melitz and Ottaviano (2008). We show that a larger network effect intensifies competition by allowing more‐productive firms to raise prices and earn higher profits, but forcing less‐productive firms to reduce prices and earn lower profits. As a result, low‐productivity firms are driven out of the market. We also show that when network effects are asymmetric, it may be difficult for firms from a country with a small network effect to compete with firms from a country with a large network effect.     

Maximizing public value for subsidized non-profit firms: a mathematical economic model

In many public service industries, firms are assumed to maximize certain public goals and are not allowed to make any profits. These public service firms are financed by fixed and variable subsidies and fees-for-services paid by users. Standard economic models, such as the profit maximization and cost minimization model, are not suitable for describing the production structure and the economic behavior of these firms. Productivity and efficiency measures derived from these models therefore are not accurate. This paper derives a model that fits this type of firm and its economic context. It derives the exact mathematical relationships between public value, services delivered, (money) revenues, costs, service prices, resource prices and subsidies. In an empirical setting the model can be used as a reference to calculate productivity and efficiency scores. The usability of the model is demonstrated by an application to Social Labor Services in the Netherlands.     

Competition with Aftermarket Power When Consumers Are Heterogeneous

We study a model of competitive foremarkets and partly monopolized aftermarkets. We show that high aftermarket power prompts firms to engage in inefficiently aggressive below‐cost pricing in the foremarket. This inefficiency is driven by the presence of consumers with valuations below marginal cost. While for intermediate aftermarket power their presence leads to a competition‐softening effect, for high aftermarket power firms attract increasing numbers of unprofitable consumers by aggressively pricing below cost. For high aftermarket power, firms' equilibrium profits can therefore be decreasing in aftermarket power but are always higher than for low aftermarket power. If firms engage in price discrimination by bundling the foremarket and aftermarket goods or by reducing their aftermarket power, they avoid selling to unprofitable consumers but also reduce the competition‐softening effect. This decreases firms' equilibrium profits but increases consumer and social welfare.     

Institutional antecedents and performance consequences of employment security and career advancement practices: Evidence from the people's republic of China

In this study, we examine the provision of employment security and career advancement opportunities in firms of diverse institutional ownership and the impact of such practices on employee and firm outcomes. The sample included 478 state‐owned and non‐state‐owned firms (i.e., domestic private firms, Sino‐foreign joint ventures, and wholly‐foreign‐owned firms) in the People's Republic of China. We found that the provision of employment security was greater in state‐owned than in non‐state‐owned firms. The provision of career advancement opportunities in domestic private firms and Sino‐foreign joint ventures was similar to that in wholly foreign‐owned firms, but greater than that in state‐owned firms. The provision of career advancement opportunities was positively related to employee organizational commitment, citizenship behaviors, and firm performance. The provision of employment security was positively related to employee organizational commitment, but not to citizenship behaviors or firm performance. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Options Compensation as a Commitment Mechanism in Oligopoly Competition

We analyze how CEO stock options compensation can be used as a commitment device in oligopolistic competition. We develop a two‐stage model where shareholders choose managerial compensation to commit their managers to being aggressive in equilibrium. Our results may explain why some shareholders appear to incentivize ‘excessive’ risk taking through stock options compensation. We analyze how our results are impacted by product quality, marginal cost, product differentiation, and industry concentration. As motivation for our research, we show that there exists positive empirical correlation between industry concentration and options compensation vega within a sample of firms, as suggested by our model. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

融资约束对企业生产率的影响——基于系统GMM方法的国企与民企差异检验

本文基于2003～2009年中国制造业上市公司面板数据,运用附加融资约束变量的增广生产函数和系统广义矩估计方法,研究国企和民企资金可获得性在影响生产率方面的差异。结果发现,上市公司生产率从总体上看不受制于内源融资,但按所有制分类后,只有民企存在融资约束并显著影响生产率,生产率高的民企通常拥有丰裕的内源资金;进一步按流动性与负债状况分类后仍不改变结论,而且流动性差、负债率高的民企所受约束更加严重。