Search

Why does individual performance pay seem to prevail in human capital intensive industries? We present a model that may explain this. In a repeated game model of relational contracting, we analyze the conditions for implementing peer dependent incentive regimes when agents possess indispensable human capital. We show that the larger the share of values that the agents can hold-up, the lower is the implementable degree of peer dependent incentives. In a setting with team effects — complementary tasks and peer pressure, respectively — we show that while team-based incentives are optimal if agents are dispensable, it may be costly, and in fact suboptimal, to provide team incentives once the agents become indispensable.

Why does individual performance pay seem to prevail in human-capital-intensive industries where teamwork is so common? We present a model that aims to explain this. In a repeated game model of relational contracting, we analyze the conditions for implementing peerdependent incentive regimes when agents possess indispensable human capital. We show that the larger the share of values that the agents can hold-up, the lower is the implementable degree of peer-dependent incentives. In a setting with team effects - complementary tasks and peer pressure, respectively - we show that while group-based incentives are optimal if agents are dispensable, it may be costly, and in fact suboptimal, to provide team incentives once the agents become indispensable.

In this paper, a formal rent-seeking theory of the firm is developed. The main idea is that integration (compared to non-integration) facilitates rent-seeking for the integrating party, but makes it harder for the integrated one. In a one-period model, this implies that the rent-seeking contest becomes more uneven and the parties rent-seek less. Here, integration is optimal. In the infinitely-repeated version of the model, it is also possible for the parties to enter a relational contract, under which each promises not to engage in rent-seeking. Such a contract must be self-enforcing, for it cannot be enforced by court. It is shown that integration makes the relational contract less easily sustainable, as, due to its cost advantage, the integrating party gains more from deviating than any party under non-integration. Hence, integration is preferred, if relational contracts are not sustainable, while, otherwise, non-integration may well be preferred. Moreover, it is shown that the model’s predictions are in line with many empirical facts on the choice of ownership structures.

This paper analyzes the problem of optimal job design when there is only one contractible and imperfect performance measure for all tasks whose contribution to firm value is non-veritable. I find that task splitting is optimal when relational contracts based on firm value are not feasible. By contrast, if an agent who performs a given set of tasks receives an implicit bonus, the principal always benefits from assigning an additional task to this agent.

We examine how social preferences affect behavior and surplus in relational contracts. Experimental subjects participate in a contracting environment similar to Brown, Falk, and Fehr [Brown, M., Falk, A. & Fehr, E., “Relational Contracts and the Nature of Market Interactions, Econometrica, 72 (2004):747-780] and in social preference experiments adapted from Charness and Rabin [Charness, G. & Rabin, M. “Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 117(2002): 817-869]. Subjects’ behavior during the Charness and Rabin experiment is a significant predictor of behavior and outcomes observed during the subsequent multi-period, finite-horizon, relational- contracting environment, which features market power, unenforceable performance, reputation formation and endogenous matching of trading partners. Compared to subjects who respond to the Charness-Rabin games in a fashion consistent with purely self-interested, competitive or reciprocal social preferences, buyers and sellers with alternative social preference structures engage in contracts with substantially higher quality and price, which leads to greater surplus for both parties. A key difference is that self-interested, competitive and reciprocal buyers respond to early-period shirking by extending subsequent offers that are less generous to the seller, while buyers with other social preferences extend subsequent offers that are more generous. Reciprocal and competitive sellers and, to a lesser extent, self-interested sellers, deliver sub-contractual levels of quality more often, which substantially lowers buyer and total welfare. We conclude that intentional or ‘cold’ measures of social preferences have considerable predictive power in dynamic, interactive (or ‘hot’) economic settings.

Diese Dissertation enthält vier Aufsätze zur Theorie der Anreizsetzung bei nicht-verifizierbaren Leistungsmaßen. Es werden positive Dominanzanalysen für Anreizmechanismen durchgeführt, die in realen wirtschaftlichen Situationen Anwendung finden. Der erste Aufsatz analysiert zwei Bonus-Wettbewerbe in Unternehmen. Der Prinzipal kann entweder einen Bonuspool festlegen, dessen Aufteilung von der Leistung der Agenten abhängt, oder bereits ex ante die Höhe der Boni fixieren. Eine höhere Präzision der Leistungsmessung führt nur im zweiten Fall zu stärkeren Anreizen. Die optimale Wahl des Wettbewerbs hängt von den Präferenzen der Agenten, ihren Liquiditätsbeschränkungen und den Kosten der Leistungsmessung ab. Der zweite Aufsatz untersucht die optimale Zuordnung von Aufgaben auf Stellen wenn relationale Verträge basierend auf subjektiven Leistungsmaßen explizite Anreizverträge ergänzen können. Die Spaltung von Aufgaben ist optimal, wenn die glaubhafte Bindung an relationale Verträge nicht möglich ist. Dagegen sollten Aufgaben immer dann gebündelt werden, wenn relationale Verträge bereits bestehen. Im dritten Aufsatz möchte ein Käufer eine Innovation erwerben. Um qualitätssteigernde Investitionen bei potentiellen Anbietern zu induzieren, kann der Käufer entweder einen fixen Preis ausschreiben oder einen Auktionsmechanismus nutzen. Obwohl Investitionen unter der Auktion immer höher sind, bevorzugt der Käufer einen fixen Preis wenn die Grenzkosten der Qualitätsmessung hoch sind oder die Produktionstechnologie starken Zufallseinflüssen unterliegt. Im letzten Aufsatz möchte ein Prinzipal das Produktionsergebnis zweier Agenten maximieren, die vor der Produktion in eine kostenreduzierende Innovation investieren können. Dabei kommt es zu Spillover-Effekten. Bei einer allgemeinen Preissubvention sind Investitionen stets zu gering, während ein Innovationswettbewerb zu Unter- und Überinvestitionen führen kann. Der Prinzipal bevorzugt eine Preissubvention bei starken Spillover-Effekten. This thesis consists of four self-contained essays that compare real-world incentive schemes used to mitigate moral hazard problems under non-verifiable performance. The first essay contrasts the impact of the precision of performance measurement on wage costs in U- and J-type tournaments. In U-type tournaments prizes are fixed. In J-type tournaments only an overall wage sum is specified. The principal prefers a U-type tournament if workers receive a rent under limited liability and the costs of increasing precision are low. However, if workers are inequity-averse and have unlimited liability, the J-type tournament leads to lower wage costs. The second essay analyzes optimal job design when there is only one contractible and imperfect performance measure for all tasks whose contribution to firm value is non-verifiable. Task splitting is optimal when relational contracts based on firm value are not feasible. By contrast, if an agent who performs a given set of tasks receives an implicit bonus, the principal always benefits from assigning an additional task to this agent. The third essay compares an auction and a tournament in a procurement setting with non-contractible quality signals. Signals are affected by firms' non-observable investments in R&D and the procurer's precision of quality measurement. Although investments are always higher with the auction, the procurer may prefer the tournament if marginal costs of quality measurement are high or the production technology for quality is highly random. In the last essay, a principal wants to induce two agents to produce an output. Agents can undertake non-contractible investments to reduce production cost of the output. Part of this "innovation" spills over and also reduces production cost of the other agent. Agents always underinvest with a general output price subsidy, while they may or may not do so with an innovation tournament. Strong spillovers tend to favor a general output price subsidy.

We model networks of relational (or implicit) contracts, exploring how sanctioning power and equilibrium conditions change under different network configurations and information transmission technologies. In our model relations are the links, and the value of the network lies in its ability to enforce cooperative agreements that could not be sustained if agents had no access to other network members’ sanctioning power and information. We identify conditions for network stability and in-network information transmission as well as conditions under which stable sub-networks inhibit more valuable larger networks. The model provides formal definitions for individual and communities’ ‘social capital’ in the spirit of Coleman and Putnam.

The benefits and costs of different forms of job design have been analyzed in the literature yet. The focus has thereby mostly been on job designs under formal contracts between the parties. However, in the real world relational contracts - informal agreements sustained by the value of future relationships - play a role as important as formal ones. This paper therefore considers the advantages and disadvantages of two different kinds of job design, partial del- egation and complete delegation with specialization, when the parties make use of both, formal and informal agreements. It is found that many of the results derived in the absence of informal contracts will no longer hold, if these contracts become available.

We analyze a repeated principal-agent trust game where the principal makes a specific investment by paying the agent up-front, expecting an agreed upon quality level in return. The verifiability of the agent’s action is endogenously determined by the principal’s investment in writing an explicit contract. Since verification is not certain, explicit contracting is insufficient, and the parties must engage in relational (implicit) contracting. First, we analyze how variations in trust (the discount factor) affect the contract equilibrium. Interestingly, we find that more trust may lead to lower levels of specific investments. This occurs when the surplus from trust is realized mainly through lower explicit contract costs. Second, we extend the literature on the interaction between explicit and relational governance by analyzing how variations in verification technology affect contract equilibrium. Since verification technology determines the cost necessary to achieve a given probability of verification, this analysis can also explain interesting aspects of legal systems.

We model networks of relational (or implicit) contracts, exploring how sanctioning power and equilibrium conditions change under different network configurations and information transmission technologies. In our model, relations are the links, and the value of the network lies in its ability to enforce cooperative agreements that could not be sustained if agents had no access to other network members’ sanctioning power and information. We identify conditions for network stability and in-network information transmission as well as conditions under which stable subnetworks inhibit more valuable larger networks.

L'arbitre du commerce international peut-il, en l'absence de clause contractuelle expresse, procéder à l'adaptation du contrat lorsque survient un changement de circonstances qui modifie de façon substantielle l'équilibre contractuel initial? La complexification des schémas contractuels et l'émergence correspondante de nouvelles valeurs contractuelles favorisent la réception du principe rebus sic stantibus dans le droit commercial international. Les deux phénomènes permettent également d'envisager dans une nouvelle perspective les objections traditionnelles à la révision pour imprévision. Les arbitres du commerce international sont appelés à jouer un rôle, bien que modeste, dans le mouvement d'harmonisation privé du droit commercial international. Le contexte international de l'arbitrage et de la relation contractuelle, la volonté d'apaisement inhérente à ce mode de résolution des différends et le rapport particulier qu'entretient l'arbitre du commerce international avec le droit national permettront à ce dernier de privilégier, dans certaines circonstances, une option comme l'adaptation du contrat pour cause de hardship. Plusieurs facteurs devront cependant être examinés attentivement par le tribunal arbitral avant que ne soit prise la décision de procéder à l'adaptation du contrat. D'autres remèdes pourront être envisagés si une telle solution ne convient pas., Is the arbitrator of international commerce entitled to adapt the contract when the parties did not provide so expressly and a supervening event provokes a substantiel change in the initial contractual equilibrum? The complexification of contractual schemes and the corresponding emergence of new values in contract theory made the reception of the rebus sic stantibus principle highly probable in international commercial law. These two phenomenas supplied keys for a revised perspective of the traditional objections to the application of the rebus sic stantibus principle. Arbitrators have a role to play in the movement of private harmonization of international commercial law. The international context in which they proceed, the inherent quality of appeasement in arbitration and the particularity of the relation between arbitrator and national law are making it possible for international arbitrators to give priority to adaptation of the contract when the circumstances are right. Many factors will have to be analysed by the arbitrator before he chooses to adapt the contract because adaptation is not always the best solution. Other remedies will have to be devised if it is the case., "Mémoire présenté à la faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de maîtrise, option droit des affaires (LL.M.)". Ce mémoire a été accepté à l'unanimité et classé parmi les 10% des mémoires de la discipline.

We provide evidence that long-term relationships between trading parties emerge endogenously in the absence of third party enforcement of contracts and are associated with a fundamental change in the nature of market interactions. Without third party enforcement, the vast majority of trades are initiated with private offers and the parties share the gains from trade equally. Low effort or bad quality is penalized by the termination of the relationship, wielding a powerful effect on contract enforcement. Successful long-term relations exhibit generous rent sharing and high effort (quality) from the very beginning of the relationship. In the absence of third-party enforcement, markets resemble a collection of bilateral trading islands rather than a competitive market. If contracts are third party enforceable, rent sharing and long-term relations are absent and the vast majority of trades are initiated with public offers. Most trades take place in one-shot transactions and the contracting parties are indifferent with regard to the identity of their trading partner.

We show that when the researcher’s (observable but not contractible) contribution to innovation is crucial, a covenant not to compete (CNC) reduces e.ort and profits under both spot and relational contracts. Having no CNC allows the researcher to leave for a rival. This alleviates a commitment problem by forcing the firm to reward a successful researcher. However, if the firm’s R&D investment mainly matters, including a CNC in the contract is optimal, as it ensures the firm’s incentives to invest.

In a setting where two managers make relationship- and asset-specific investments, the optimal relational contract specifies the same payments that renegotiations would have led to in a spot mode, plus a fixed transfer and a one-step bonus scheme. The choice of ownership is shown to depend critically on the punishment strategies and the nature of the uncertainty.

Collusive agreements and relational contracts are commonly modeled as equilibria of dynamic games with the strategic features of the repeated Prisoner's Dilemma. The pay-offs agents obtain when being ‘cheated upon’ by other agents play no role in these models. We propose a way to take these pay-offs into account, and find that cooperation as equilibrium of the infinitely repeated discounted Prisoner's Dilemma is often implausible: for a significant subset of the pay-off discount factor parameter space, all cooperation equilibria are strictly risk dominated in the sense of Harsanyi and Selten (1988). We derive an easy-to-calculate critical level for the discount factor below which this happens, also function of pay-offs obtained when others defect, and argue it is a better measure for the ‘likelihood’ of cooperation than the critical level at which cooperation is supportable in equilibrium. Our results apply to other games sharing the strategic structure of the Prisoner's Dilemma (repeated oligopolies, relational-contracting models, etc.). We illustrate our main result for collusion equilibria in the repeated Cournot duopoly.

Globalization – improved access to integrated, anonymous markets – is claimed to crowd out cooperative relations: from reciprocal exchange to lifetime employment, from relational governance to corruption/collusion. We study how agents’ intertemporal preferences and their access to markets interact and affect their ability to sustain generalized cooperative relations. The aversion to intertemporal substitution, a regular feature of real world agents, facilitates cooperation by decreasing the evaluation of short-run gains from unilateral defections and by increasing that of losses from punishment phases. Access to goods’ markets and ‘money’ may then hinder cooperation by undoing these effects, allowing agents to save and reallocate short-run gains from defections in time at some cost. With their positive return on capital (savings), financial markets make cooperation even harder to sustain, unless the market interest rate is sufficiently below agents’ discount rate or there are sufficiently strong income fluctuations. Then financial markets may in fact facilitate relations, by increasing cooperating agents’ debt capacity and allowing them to smooth fluctuations along the cooperative equilibrium path. access to finance; commons; cooperation; financial development; globalization; governance; lifetime employment; market access; reciprocal exchange; relational contracts; social capital

In this article, we study behavior in a series of two-player supply chain game experiments. Each player simultaneously chooses a capacity before demand is realized, and sales are given by the minimum of realized demand and chosen capacities. We focus on the differences in behavior under fixed pairs and random rematching. Intuition suggests that long-run relations should lead to more profitable outcomes. However, our results go against this intuition. While subjects' capacity choices are better aligned (i.e., closer together) under fixed pairs, average profits are more variable. Moreover, learning is slower under fixed pairs�so much so that over the last five periods, average profits are actually higher under random rematching. The underlying cause for this finding appears to be a �first-impressions� bias, present only under fixed matching, in which the greater the misalignment in initial choices, the lower are average profits.

This paper considers a long-term relationship between two agents who both undertake a costly action or investment that together produces a joint benefit. Agents have an opportunity to expropriate some of the joint benefit for their own use. Two cases are considered: (i) where agents are risk neutral and are subject to limited liability constraints and (ii) where agents are risk averse, have quasi-linear preferences in consumption and actions but where limited liability constraints do not bind. The question asked is how to structure the investments and division of the surplus over time so as to avoid expropriation. In the risk-neutral case, there may be an initial phase in which one agent overinvests and the other underinvests. However, both actions and surplus converge monotonically to a stationary state in which there is no overinvestment and surplus is at its maximum subject to the constraints. In the risk-averse case, there is no overinvestment. For this case, we establish that dynamics may or may not be monotonic depending on whether or not it is possible to sustain a first-best allocation. If the first-best allocation is not sustainable, then there is a trade-off between risk sharing and surplus maximization. In general, surplus will not be at its constrained maximum even in the long run.

International audience; In France as in other European countries, farm outsourcing has been developing for the past twenty years. Today, this phenomenon concerns both small and large farms. What is surprising is the growing number of farmers who outsource precision farming operations that involve sophisticated technologies and specialized expertise. This stylized fact is rather counter-intuitive to the known result of transaction cost theory, according to which in the presence of specific assets, ownership prevails over outsourcing. The objective of our study is to analyze the determinants of these new agricultural outsourcing practices associated with precision agriculture. We start with the transaction costs and property rights frameworks, then discuss recent theoretical contributions of relational contracts to explain the possibility of outsourcing in the presence of high asset specificity. Empirical evidences are provided for France using a mixed research methodology. Based on original data from surveys of 1200 farmers and of 20 of medium and large custom operators, our methodology combines an estimation of discrete choice models of outsourcing for different levels of asset specificity and case studies of major farm outsourcing organizational schemes. Our results show that in the presence of high specific assets, outsourcing can be preferred to ownership for strategic reasons. This phenomenon is counter-intuitive from the point of view of transaction cost theory, but is possible when one considers possible ex-ante incentive mechanisms (expectation of specialization gains, inclusion of a bonus based on the value of the output in the formal contract, participation of a third party), and informal incentive mechanisms built through repeated interactions.

The relationship between Australian nonprofit community service providers and government has been the subject of a considerable deal of scholarly and practitioner analysis, mostly directed at analysing its changing nature, deficiencies and suggestions for improvement. Socio-legal analysis of the relationship in Australia is a very modest part of this literature (Carney, Ramia & Yeatman 2001; Finn & Smith 1992; McGregor-Lowndes & Turnour 2003; Meltz 1997). It is quite scant compared to analysis of government-business relations and in particular Public Private Partnerships (PPP) (for example, Carroll& Steane 2000; Duncan 2005; Hodge & Greve 2005).

This paper considers a long-term relationship between two agents who undertake costly actions or investments which produce a joint benefit. Agents have an opportunity to expropriate some of the joint benefit for their own use. The question asked is how to structure the investments and division of the surplus over time so as to avoid expropriation. It is shown that investments may be either above or below the efficient level and that actions and the division of the surplus converges to a stationary solution at which either both investment levels are efficient or both are below the efficient level.