Strategic Managerial Incentive Compensation In Japan: Relative Performance Evaluation And Product Market Collusion
AbstractIn an oligopolistic product market, shareholders strategically use information on rival firms' performances when designing management-incentive contracts. When shareholders use industry performance information through relative performances evaluation (RPE), they evaluate their manager's effort more easily, but hinder collusive behavior in the product market. However, when compensation is positively linked to the industry performance through strategic group performance evaluation (SGPE), the credibility of a manager's commitment to product market collusion increases, and the sustainability of a collusive outcome increases. I test how industry performance affects management-incentive compensation using the data from 796 Japanese firms during the period 1968 to 1992. The results show that management compensation is positively linked to industry profit, suggesting the use of SGPE in management-incentive compensation. Cross-sectional analysis shows that the positive effect of industry profit on management compensation is higher in competitive industries than in concentrated industries. The positive effect is greater in slow-growing industries than in fast-growing industries. Empirical tests incorporating the risk component method show the same results. These results are consistent with the argument that, in a growing market or in a concentrated market, the value of SGPE diminishes as the value of commitment to collusion diminishes. © 1999 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by MIT Press in its journal The Review of Economics and Statistics.
Volume (Year): 81 (1999)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Takao Kato & Cheryl Long, 2004. "Executive Compensation, Firm Performance, and State Ownership in China: Evidence from New Panel Data," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 2004-690, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
- Kato, Takao & Long, Cheryl, 2005.
"Executive Compensation, Firm Performance, and Corporate Governance in China: Evidence from Firms Listed in the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges,"
IZA Discussion Papers
1767, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Kato, Takao & Long, Cheryl, 2006. "Executive Compensation, Firm Performance, and Corporate Governance in China: Evidence from Firms Listed in the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(4), pages 945-83, July.
- Albuquerque, Ana, 2009. "Peer firms in relative performance evaluation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 69-89, October.
- Kato, Takao & Kim, Woochan & Lee, Ju Ho, 2005.
"Executive Compensation, Firm Performance, and Chaebols in Korea: Evidence from New Panel Data,"
IZA Discussion Papers
1783, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Kato, Takao & Kim, Woochan & Lee, Ju Ho, 2007. "Executive compensation, firm performance, and Chaebols in Korea: Evidence from new panel data," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 36-55, January.
- Constantine Manasakis & Evangelos Mitrokostas & Emmanuel Petrakis, 2010.
"Endogenous managerial incentive contracts in a differentiated duopoly, with and without commitment,"
Managerial and Decision Economics,
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(8), pages 531-543, December.
- Constantine Manasakis & Evangelos Mitrokostas & Emmanuel Petrakis, 2009. "Endogenous managerial incentive contracts in a differentiated duopoly, with and without commitment," Working Papers 0905, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
- Vicente Cuñat & Maria Guadalupe, 2005.
"How Does Product Market Competition Shape Incentive Contracts?,"
Journal of the European Economic Association,
MIT Press, vol. 3(5), pages 1058-1082, 09.
- Vicente Cuñat & María Guadalupe, 2005. "How Does Product Market Competition Shape Incentive Contracts?," CEP Discussion Papers dp0687, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
- Stefan Beiner & Markus Schmid & Gabrielle Wanzenried, 2004. "Product Market Competition, Managerial Inventives, and Firm Valuation," Diskussionsschriften dp0412, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
- R. Andergassen, 2011. "Board of director collusion, managerial incentives and firm values," Working Papers wp795, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
- Marco Celentani & Rosa Loveira-Pazó, 2004. "What form of relative performance evaluation?," Economics Working Papers 744, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
- Yue Shen & Youjun Xu & Jingming Hao, 2011. "Strategic incentive in mixed oligopoly," Frontiers of Economics in China, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 311-326, June.
- Kato, Takao & Kubo, Katsuyuki, 2006. "CEO compensation and firm performance in Japan: Evidence from new panel data on individual CEO pay," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-19, March.
- Celentani, Marco & Loveira, Rosa, 2006. "A simple explanation of the relative performance evaluation puzzle," Open Access publications from Universidad Carlos III de Madrid info:hdl:10016/4824, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid.
- Constantine Manasakis & Evangelos Mitrokostas & Emmanuel Petrakis, 2007. "Endogenous Strategic Managerial Incentive Contracts," Working Papers 0706, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Karie Kirkpatrick).
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.