On the Performance of Linear Contracts

We examine the ability of linear contracts to replicate the performance of optimal unrestricted contracts in the canonical moral hazard setting with a wealth constrained, risk averse agent. We find that in a broad class of environments, the principal can always secure with a linear contract at least 95% of the profit that she secures with an optimal unrestricted contract, provided the productivity of the agent's effort is not too meager.     

Information Acquisition and the Equilibrium Incentive Problem

I study the optimal incentive provision in a principal–agent relationship with costly information acquisition by the agent. I emphasize that adverse selection or moral hazard is the principal's endogenous choice by inducing or deterring information acquisition. The principal designs the contract not only to address an existing incentive problem but also to implement its presence. Implementation of adverse selection relies on a steeper information rent to the agent than the standard menu, such that the agent is motivated to distinguish the efficient state of nature from the inefficient. Moral hazard is implemented by replacing the benchmark debt contract with a debt‐with‐equity‐share contract, such that the agent does not attempt to acquire information to either avoid debt or to extract rent.     

Optimal Loyalty‐Based Management

We study an agency model in which an entrepreneur selects a manager from a candidate set. The selected manager's effort improves the project's potential environment, and is a hidden action. The realized project environment is the entrepreneur's private information. A manager's utility has two components—(i) loyalty, with which the manager values the organization's profit, and (ii) selfishness, with which the manager values the monetary transfer he receives from the entrepreneur. We find that if the manager's task is easy enough, it is optimal to use a purely loyal manager. Otherwise, it can be optimal to use a manager with mixture of loyalty and selfishness—the manager's mixed motivation alleviates the entrepreneur's misrepresenting incentive, and as a result, the output distortion in the optimal contract can be reduced. In addition, when it is optimal to use a manager with mixed motivations, the entrepreneur selects someone who is more selfish than loyal.     

Team Incentives and Reference‐Dependent Preferences

We investigate a multi‐agent moral‐hazard model where agents have expectation‐based reference‐dependent preferences à la K?szegi and Rabin (2006, 2007). We show that even when each agent's probability of success in a project is independent, a principal may employ team incentives. Because the agents are loss averse, they have first‐order risk aversion to wage uncertainty. This causes the agents to work harder when their own failure is stochastically compensated through other agents' performance. In the optimal contract, agents with high performance are always rewarded, whereas agents with low performance are rewarded if and only if other agents' performance is high.     

Effects of Target Timing and Contract Frame on Individual Performance

Abstract

This study experimentally examines the effects of target timing and contract frame on individual performance. We study four target-based incentive contracts, categorised by when participants learn the performance target (ex ante, or before production starts, vs. ex post, or after production ends) and how the incentive contract is framed (bonus vs. penalty). The performance target in this study is determined by a peer group's average productivity. We find that performance is significantly higher for bonus-framed contracts when the performance target is revealed ex post, as opposed to ex ante. In contrast, revealing the peer-based performance target ex ante or ex post has no impact on performance for penalty-framed contracts. We also find that the ex post, bonus-framed contract significantly outperforms the other three contracts. This finding supports practitioners' claim that employers should reward (as opposed to punish) individuals based on their performance, relative to that of their peers, ex post.     

Locally robust contracts for moral hazard

We consider a moral hazard problem in which the principal has a slight uncertainty about how the agent’s actions translate into output. An incentive contract can be made robust against an $ϵ$ amount of uncertainty, at the cost of a loss to the principal on the order of $\sqrt{ϵ}$, by refunding a small fraction of profit to the agent. We show that as $ϵ$ goes to zero, this construction is essentially optimal, in the sense of minimizing the worst-case loss, among all modifications to the contract that do not depend on the details of the environment.     

Accountability in an agency model: Project selection,effort incentives,and contract design*

We analyze an agency model of project choice and implementation where the agent is held accountable for his performance. We show that implementation of the ex ante efficient project may be impossible, irrespective of how the principal sets fixed wage and bonus rate. If it is possible, the principal may be forced to increase the bonus rate above the optimal project‐specific rate. The higher profit share compensates the agent for pressure he faces when he has to justify/explain his performance.     

Dynamic incentive contracts with termination threats

We consider a dynamic moral hazard model where the principal offers a series of short-run contracts. We study the optimal mix of two alternative instruments for incentive provision: a performance based wage (a “carrot”) and a termination threat (a “stick”). At any given point in time, these instruments are substitutes in the provision of incentives. We are particularly interested in the dynamic interaction of these two instruments. Both carrot and stick are used more intensively as the agent approaches the end of his finite life. The sharing of the surplus of the relationship plays a key role: a termination threat is included in the optimal contract if and only if the agent’s expected future gain from the relationship is sufficiently high, compared to the principal’s expected future gain. Also, a termination threat is more likely to be optimal if output depends more on “luck” than on effort, if the discount factor is high, or if the agent’s productivity is low. The model, provided that the optimal contract includes a termination threat, essentially provides an alternative explanation for upward-sloping wage profiles even in the absence of full-commitment.     

Peer Evaluation: Incentives and Coworker Relations

In many workplaces, coworkers have the best information about each other's efforts. This paper studies a principal who only observes the joint output by two limitedly liable agents, while agents receive signals about each other's effort levels. The principal attempts to exploit this information through peer evaluation; agents are asked to report their signal and may receive a bonus for being evaluated positively. Lying aversion ascertains that truthful evaluation is possible, while interpersonal relations between colleagues give an incentive to misreport. This paper shows that peer evaluation gives an incentive for effort, even when the evaluations are not truthful. The peer evaluation bonus is constrained by more intensive coworker relations. Still, the optimal contract always includes a peer evaluation bonus, sometimes complemented with a team bonus. Coworker relations have nonmonotonic effects on profits in the optimal contract.     

On contracting for uncertain R&D

Using a two‐stage model, this paper studies auctions of research and development (R&D) contracts when the outcome of research is uncertain. The agent is contracted by the principal to invent a new product or a new process. The principal selects the most capable agent through an auction and writes an incentive contract with the winning agent to share risks. The main finding of the paper is that the generally superior incentive contracts might not be desirable under plausible conditions in R&D contracting. In particular, we find that the principal prefers a cost‐plus contract in cases of large R&D projects or rising innovation benefits, but would prefer a fixed‐price contract when the number of bidders increases. An alternate elasticity interpretation of results holds promise for empirical analysis. Public policy implications are finally discussed. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

CONTRACTS,ENTREPRENEURS, MARKET CREATION AND JUDGEMENT: THE CONTEMPORARY MAINSTREAM THEORY OF THE FIRM IN PERSPECTIVE

This survey gives an overview of the theory of the firm as it is formulated within the contemporary ‘mainstream’ of economics. Two groupings of theories are briefly discussed: principal–agent and incomplete contract models. Next, three of the most recent contributions regarding firms are considered. The reference point approach is looked at first followed by a discussion of Spulber's book The Theory of the Firm. Last, we consider the entrepreneurial judgement perspective.     

Stochastic costly state verification and dynamic contracts

I consider a dynamic costly state verification environment in which a risk-averse agent enters into a contract with a risk-neutral principal. The agent has random income which is unknown to the principal but can be verified at a cost. The principal can commit to executing random verifications.I extend the standard recursive methods to study the problem and show that it is optimal to set verification probabilities strictly less than 1. If the agent׳s absolute risk aversion declines sufficiently slowly, the principal will use verification regardless of its cost. If the agent's income is verified then he would get consumption and continuation utility strictly higher than if his income were not verified.     

Design of firm‐specific training in an agency relationship: Who should take the initiative?

This paper considers the twofold problem of compensation contracting and the design of a human capital investment scheme. Before contracting, the principal and the agent can engage in a joint stochastic production process of exerting effort to raise the agent's productivity in the firm. The principal can employ synchronous effort exertion, or either actor can assume a leadership role. We determine which organizational design is best for the principal at the endogenously optimal compensation contract, depending on how the efforts interact.     

Group Identity and the Moral Hazard Problem: Experimental Evidence

We experimentally examine how real group identity of parties (a principal and an agent) facing a moral hazard problem may attenuate the problem and thereby implement the efficient outcome. We find that, the frequency of the efficient outcome is significantly higher when both parties share the same identity than when they do not. However, when we induce a substantially weaker form of identity or increase an outside‐option payoff offered to the principal, the frequency of the efficient outcome diminishes considerably, even when the parties’ identities align perfectly. Our results have important implications for the design of nonpecuniary contract enforcement devices.     

Do tournaments solve the adverse selection problem?

This paper provides a solution to a puzzle in the analysis of tournaments, that of why there is no agent discrimination or differential contracting in certain business practice settings. The paper examines the problem of a principal contracting with multiple agents whose activities are subject to common shocks. The presence of common shocks invites the use of relative performance evaluation to minimize the costs of moral hazard. But, in the additional presence of adverse selection, the analysis shows that there may be no need for ex ante screening through menus of offers. This is so because the principal becomes better informed ex post about agent types, via the realization of common uncertainty, and can effectively penalize or reward the agents ex post. Thus, unlike the standard adverse selection problem without common uncertainty where the principal always benefits from ex ante screening, it is shown that ex post sorting through relative performance evaluation reduces the scope for ex ante screening through menus, and can eliminate it completely if agents are known to not be very heterogeneous. This is consistent with observed practice in industries where the primary compensation mechanism is a cardinal tournament which is uniform among employees. The analysis connotes that by using relative instead of absolute performance measures, firms with employees who are not substantially heterogeneous not only can alleviate the agency problem, but there is also no need to extract the agents' ex ante private information about their innate abilities via a screening menu.     

Asymmetric sequential search under incomplete information

We study a multistage sequential search model with n agents who compete for one job. The agents arrive sequentially, each one in a different stage. The agents' abilities, which are private information, are derived from heterogeneous distribution functions. In each stage, the designer chooses an ability threshold. If an agent has a higher ability than the threshold in the stage in which he arrives, he gets the job and the search is over. The agent's ability is not revealed when he wins the job and the designer has only an estimation of this ability according to the threshold placed by him. We analyze the optimal ability thresholds imposed by the designer who wishes to maximize the ability estimation of the agent who gets the job net of the search cost. We also investigate the relation between the optimal ability thresholds as well as the optimal order of agents in all stages according to the agents' distributions of abilities.     

Contracting under ex post moral hazard and non-commitment

This paper characterizes the optimal insurance contract in an environment where an informed agent can misrepresent the state of the world to a principal who cannot credibly commit to an auditing strategy. Because the principal cannot commit, the optimal strategy of the agent is not to tell the truth all the time. Assuming that there are T > 1 possible losses, and that the agent cannot fake an accident (he is constrained only to misreport the size of the loss when a loss occurs), the optimal contract is such that higher losses are over-compensated while lower losses are on average under-compensated. The amount by which higher losses are over-compensated decreases as the loss increases. The optimal contract may then be represented as a simple combination of a deductible, a lump-sum payment and a coinsurance provision.Received: 29 January 1999, Accepted: 26 June 2001, JEL Classification: D82, G2, C72.I would like to thank my dissertation committee Stanley Baiman, David Cummins, Georges Dionne, Neil Doherty and Sharon Tennyson (supervisor) for their insights, as well as Keith Crocker, Steve Coate, Richard Derrig, Michele Piccone and Pascale Viala. The financial help received during my doctoral studies from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) and the S. S. Huebner Foundation are gratefully acknowledged. This research has been funded by the Fonds pour la Formation de Chercheurs et d'Aide à la Recherche (FCAR-Québec), SSHRC-Canada and the Risk Management Chair at HEC Montréal. The continuing financial support of CIRANO is also appreciated. I am responsible for all errors.     

Understanding how heterogeneous agents affect Principal's returns: Perspectives from short-termism and Bayesian learning

We consider a general framework of optimal contract design under the heterogeneity and short-termism of agents. Our research shows that the optimal contract must weigh the agent's information rent, incentive cost, and benefit to overcome the contract's adverse selection and moral hazards. Agents with higher moral levels were more likely to choose higher effort and lower manipulation. Simultaneously, the principal offers lower incentives and receives more significant payoff. We also extend our model to investigate the benefits of Bayesian learning. Furthermore, we compare the principal's returns in general and learning models and find that the learning contract can bring more profit to the principal.     

Role of Information Rents in Relational Contracts

We study a repeated contracting model in which the agent has private information and the performance measure is unverifiable. In an optimal stationary contract, when the discount factor is not high, the principal's objective shifts from purely reducing the information rent toward increasing the total surplus to sustain the relational contract. As a result, the total surplus is not monotonically increasing in the discount factor and could decrease when the unverifiable performance measure becomes verifiable.     

Delegation of risky activities

This paper studies the delegation contract of a risky activity under the presence of adverse selection and moral hazard. The problem is posed as providing incentives from the principal to the agent to enhance the protective action of the agent through payment schemes. Given non‐bankruptcy of both the principal and the agent, the principal rewards the agent if no accident occurs but penalizes the agent if an accident occurs. Given bankruptcy of either the principal or the agent, regardless of the agent's risk type, the agent is only rewarded with the same amount of remuneration and not penalized if the accident occurs. The social welfare level resulting from contracting processes depends on the asset levels of both parties and the agent's technology to reduce risks of the activity. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.