IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joecth/v66y2018i4d10.1007_s00199-017-1073-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incentive contracting under ambiguity aversion

Author

Listed:
  • Qi Liu

    (Peking University)

  • Lei Lu

    (University of Manitoba)

  • Bo Sun

    (Federal Reserve Board)

Abstract

This paper studies a principal–agent model in which the information on future firm performance is ambiguous and the agent is averse to ambiguity. We show that if firm risk is ambiguous, while stocks always induce the agent to perceive a high risk, options can induce him to perceive a low risk. As a result, options can be less costly in incentivizing the agent than stocks in the presence of ambiguity. In addition, we show that providing the agent with more incentives would induce the agent to perceive a higher risk, and there is a discontinuous jump in the compensation cost as incentives increase, which makes the principal reluctant to reset contracts frequently when underlying fundamentals change. Thus, compensation contracts exhibit an inertia property. Lastly, the model sheds some light on the use of relative performance evaluation and provides a rationale for the puzzle of pay-for-luck in the presence of ambiguity.

Suggested Citation

  • Qi Liu & Lei Lu & Bo Sun, 2018. "Incentive contracting under ambiguity aversion," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 66(4), pages 929-950, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:66:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s00199-017-1073-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s00199-017-1073-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00199-017-1073-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00199-017-1073-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alex Edmans & Xavier Gabaix, 2011. "Tractability in Incentive Contracting," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 24(9), pages 2865-2894.
    2. Smith, Clifford Jr. & Watts, Ross L., 1992. "The investment opportunity set and corporate financing, dividend, and compensation policies," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 263-292, December.
    3. Larry G. Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2008. "Ambiguity, Information Quality, and Asset Pricing," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(1), pages 197-228, February.
    4. Mark Schneider & Jonathan W. Leland & Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2018. "Ambiguity framed," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 133-151, October.
      • Mark Schneider & Jonathan Leland & Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2016. "Ambiguity Framed," Working Papers 16-11, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    5. Ingolf Dittmann & Ernst Maug, 2007. "Lower Salaries and No Options? On the Optimal Structure of Executive Pay," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(1), pages 303-343, February.
    6. Kellner, Christian, 2015. "Tournaments as a response to ambiguity aversion in incentive contracts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 627-655.
    7. Bizjak, John M. & Lemmon, Michael L. & Naveen, Lalitha, 2008. "Does the use of peer groups contribute to higher pay and less efficient compensation?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 152-168, November.
    8. Easley, David & O'Hara, Maureen, 2010. "Liquidity and valuation in an uncertain world," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 1-11, July.
    9. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1987. "Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 303-328, March.
    10. Karni, Edi, 2009. "A reformulation of the maxmin expected utility model with application to agency theory," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1-2), pages 97-112, January.
    11. Jack Stecher & Timothy Shields & John Dickhaut (deceased), 2011. "Generating Ambiguity in the Laboratory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(4), pages 705-712, April.
    12. Patrick Bolton & José Scheinkman & Wei Xiong, 2006. "Executive Compensation and Short-Termist Behaviour in Speculative Markets," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 73(3), pages 577-610.
    13. David Ahn & Syngjoo Choi & Douglas Gale & Shachar Kariv, 2014. "Estimating ambiguity aversion in a portfolio choice experiment," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 5, pages 195-223, July.
    14. Grossman, Sanford J & Hart, Oliver D, 1983. "An Analysis of the Principal-Agent Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(1), pages 7-45, January.
    15. Ingolf Dittmann & Ernst Maug & Oliver Spalt, 2010. "Sticks or Carrots? Optimal CEO Compensation when Managers Are Loss Averse," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 65(6), pages 2015-2050, December.
    16. Kevin J. Murphy & Brian J. Hall, 2000. "Optimal Exercise Prices for Executive Stock Options," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 209-214, May.
    17. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    18. Philipp Karl Illeditsch, 2011. "Ambiguous Information, Portfolio Inertia, and Excess Volatility," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(6), pages 2213-2247, December.
    19. Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2001. "Are CEOs Rewarded for Luck? The Ones Without Principals Are," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(3), pages 901-932.
    20. Faulkender, Michael & Yang, Jun, 2010. "Inside the black box: The role and composition of compensation peer groups," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 257-270, May.
    21. Jennifer N. Carpenter, 2000. "Does Option Compensation Increase Managerial Risk Appetite?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(5), pages 2311-2331, October.
    22. Marie-Louise Vierø, 2012. "Contracting in Vague Environments," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(2), pages 104-130, May.
    23. Martin Szydlowski, 2012. "Ambiguity in Dynamic Contracts," Discussion Papers 1543, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    24. David Easley & Maureen O'Hara, 2009. "Ambiguity and Nonparticipation: The Role of Regulation," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(5), pages 1817-1843, May.
    25. Philipp Weinschenk, 2010. "Moral Hazard and Ambiguity," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2010_39, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    26. Gaver, Jennifer J. & Gaver, Kenneth M., 1993. "Additional evidence on the association between the investment opportunity set and corporate financing, dividend, and compensation policies," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1-3), pages 125-160, April.
    27. Paul Oyer, 2004. "Why Do Firms Use Incentives That Have No Incentive Effects?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 59(4), pages 1619-1650, August.
    28. Epstein, Larry G & Wang, Tan, 1994. "Intertemporal Asset Pricing Under Knightian Uncertainty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 283-322, March.
    29. Stephen A. Ross, 2004. "Compensation, Incentives, and the Duality of Risk Aversion and Riskiness," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 59(1), pages 207-225, February.
    30. Holmstrom, Bengt & Tirole, Jean, 1993. "Market Liquidity and Performance Monitoring," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(4), pages 678-709, August.
    31. Canice Prendergast, 2002. "The Tenuous Trade-off between Risk and Incentives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 1071-1102, October.
    32. Jaeyoung Sung, 1995. "Linearity with Project Selection and Controllable Diffusion Rate in Continuous-Time Principal-Agent Problems," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(4), pages 720-743, Winter.
    33. Gabriel Carroll, 2015. "Robustness and Linear Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(2), pages 536-563, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jaeyoung Sung, 2022. "Optimal contracting under mean-volatility joint ambiguity uncertainties," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(2), pages 593-642, September.
    2. Jiajia Chang & Zhijun Hu & Hui Yang, 2020. "Venture Capital Contracting with Ambiguity Sharing and Effort Complementarity Effect," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-16, January.
    3. Niu, Yingjie & Yang, Jinqiang & Zou, Zhentao, 2020. "Robust contracts with one-sided commitment," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    4. Thomas Demuynck & Clément Staner, 2020. "An Efficient Revealed Preference Test for the Maxmin Expected Utility Model," Working Papers ECARES 2020-31, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    5. Wu, Wei & Niu, Yingjie & Wu, Yaoyao & Xu, Hongru, 2022. "Ambiguity, limited commitment, and the q theory of investment," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Qi Liu & Lei Lu & Bo Sun, 2017. "Incentive Contracting Under Ambiguity Aversion," International Finance Discussion Papers 1195, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    2. Alex Edmans & Xavier Gabaix, 2016. "Executive Compensation: A Modern Primer," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1232-1287, December.
    3. Ingolf Dittmann & Ko-Chia Yu & Dan Zhang, 2017. "How Important Are Risk-Taking Incentives in Executive Compensation?," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 21(5), pages 1805-1846.
    4. repec:oup:rfinst:v:21:y:2017:i:5:p:1805-1846. is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Thibaut Mastrolia & Dylan Possamaï, 2018. "Moral Hazard Under Ambiguity," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 179(2), pages 452-500, November.
    6. Agarwal, Vikas & Arisoy, Y. Eser & Naik, Narayan Y., 2017. "Volatility of aggregate volatility and hedge fund returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(3), pages 491-510.
    7. Qi Nan Zhai, 2015. "Asset Pricing Under Ambiguity and Heterogeneity," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 1-2015.
    8. Jaeyoung Sung, 2022. "Optimal contracting under mean-volatility joint ambiguity uncertainties," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(2), pages 593-642, September.
    9. Antoine Billot & Sujoy Mukerji & Jean-Marc Tallon, 2020. "Market Allocations under Ambiguity: A Survey," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 71(2), pages 267-282.
    10. Massimo Guidolin & Francesca Rinaldi, 2013. "Ambiguity in asset pricing and portfolio choice: a review of the literature," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(2), pages 183-217, February.
    11. Tzioumis, Konstantinos, 2008. "Why do firms adopt CEO stock options? Evidence from the United States," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 100-111, October.
    12. Alex Edmans & Xavier Gabaix, 2009. "Is CEO Pay Really Inefficient? A Survey of New Optimal Contracting Theories," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 15(3), pages 486-496, June.
    13. Martin Dumav, 2021. "Moral Hazard, Dynamic Incentives, and Ambiguous Perceptions," Papers 2110.15229, arXiv.org.
    14. Daniele Pennesi, 2013. "Asset Prices in an Ambiguous Economy," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 315, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    15. Stacey Beaumont & Raluca Ratiu & David Reeb & Glenn Boyle & Philip Brown & Alexander Szimayer & Raymond Silva Rosa & David Hillier & Patrick McColgan & Athanasios Tsekeris & Bryan Howieson & Zoltan Ma, 2016. "Comments on Shan and Walter: ‘Towards a Set of Design Principles for Executive Compensation Contracts’," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 52(4), pages 685-771, December.
    16. Eduard Marinov, 2016. "The 2016 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 97-149.
    17. Claudia Ravanelli & Gregor Svindland, 2019. "Ambiguity sensitive preferences in Ellsberg frameworks," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 67(1), pages 53-89, February.
    18. Sujoy Mukerji & Han N. Ozsoylev & Jean‐Marc Tallon, 2023. "Trading Ambiguity: A Tale Of Two Heterogeneities," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(3), pages 1127-1164, August.
    19. Sujoy Mukerji & Han N. Ozsoylev & Jean‐Marc Tallon, 2023. "Trading Ambiguity: A Tale Of Two Heterogeneities," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(3), pages 1127-1164, August.
    20. Baranchuk, Nina & Chib, Siddhartha, 2008. "Assessing the role of option grants to CEOs: How important is heterogeneity?," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 145-166, March.
    21. Chaigneau, Pierre & Edmans, Alex & Gottlieb, Daniel, 2018. "Does improved information improve incentives?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 291-307.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Ambiguity; Executive compensation; Options; Relative performance evaluation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G30 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - General
    • J33 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Compensation Packages; Payment Methods

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:66:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s00199-017-1073-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.