IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wut/journl/v31y2021i1p97-121id1563.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measurement of control power in corporate networks

Author

Listed:
  • Izabella Stach
  • Jacek Mercik

Abstract

This paper discusses some game-theoretical methods for measuring indirect control in complex corporate shareholding networks. The methods use power indices to estimate the direct and indirect control in shareholding structures. Some of these methods only estimate the control power of investors (firms without shareholdings), and only a few measure the control power of all firms involved in shareholding networks (which means investors and stock companies). None of them takes measuring the importance of mutual connections (edges in the networks) into consideration; thus we focus in particular on an extension of these methods in this paper to measure both the control-power of the firms involved in complex shareholding structures (represented by nodes in networks) and the importance (power) of linkages between the firms as elements of a whole corporate shareholding network. More precisely, we apply our approaches to a theoretical example of a corporate network. Moreover, we continue the considerations about reasonable properties for indirect control measurement. Some ideas of new properties are proposed. The paper also provides a brief review of the literature concerning the topic.

Suggested Citation

  • Izabella Stach & Jacek Mercik, 2021. "Measurement of control power in corporate networks," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 31(1), pages 97-121.
    • Handle: RePEc:wut:journl:v:31:y:2021:i:1:p:97-121:id:1563
    DOI: 10.37190/ord210106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ord.pwr.edu.pl/assets/papers_archive/1563%20-%20published.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.37190/ord210106?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cesarino Bertini & Jacek Mercik & Izabella Stach, 2016. "Indirect control and power," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 26(2), pages 7-30.
    2. Borm, P.E.M. & Owen, G. & Tijs, S.H., 1992. "On the position value for communication situations," Other publications TiSEM 5a8473e4-1df7-42df-ad53-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Cesarino Bertini & Josep Freixas & Gianfranco Gambarelli & Izabella Stach, 2013. "Comparing Power Indices," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 1-19.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Izabella Stach & Jacek Mercik, 2021. "Measurement of control power in corporate networks," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 31, pages 97-121.
    2. Somdeb Lahiri, 2021. "Pattanaik's axioms and the existence of winners preferred with probability at least half," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 31(2), pages 109-122.
    3. Jean-François Caulier & Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2015. "An allocation rule for dynamic random network formation processes," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 60(2), pages 283-313, October.
    4. Alexandre Skoda, 2016. "Convexity of Network Restricted Games Induced by Minimum Partitions," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 16019, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    5. Slikker, M. & Gilles, R.P. & Norde, H.W. & Tijs, S.H., 2000. "Directed Communication Networks," Discussion Paper 2000-84, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    6. Ichiro Nishizaki & Tomohiro Hayashida & Yuki Shintomi, 2016. "A core-allocation for a network restricted linear production game," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 238(1), pages 389-410, March.
    7. E. Algaba & J. M. Bilbao & P. Borm & J. J. López, 2000. "The position value for union stable systems," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 52(2), pages 221-236, November.
    8. Sridhar Mandyam & Usha Sridhar, 2017. "DON and Shapley Value for Allocation among Cooperating Agents in a Network: Conditions for Equivalence," Studies in Microeconomics, , vol. 5(2), pages 143-161, December.
    9. Liying Kang & Anna Khmelnitskaya & Erfang Shan & Dolf Talman & Guang Zhang, 2021. "The average tree value for hypergraph games," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 94(3), pages 437-460, December.
    10. Ghintran, Amandine, 2013. "Weighted position values," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 157-163.
    11. Herings, P.J.J. & van der Laan, G. & Talman, A.J.J., 2005. "The component fairness solution for cycle-free graph games," Research Memorandum 057, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    12. Takayuki Mizuno & Shohei Doi & Shuhei Kurizaki, 2020. "The power of corporate control in the global ownership network," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-19, August.
    13. Kamijo, Yoshio, 2009. "A linear proportional effort allocation rule," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 341-353, November.
    14. Borkotokey, Surajit & Sarangi, Sudipta, 2011. "Allocation rules for fixed and flexible networks: the role of players and their links," MPRA Paper 38340, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Gary E. Bolton & Kalyan Chatterjee & Kathleen L. McGinn, 2013. "How Communication Links Influence Coalition Bargaining: A Laboratory Investigation," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Bargaining in the Shadow of the Market Selected Papers on Bilateral and Multilateral Bargaining, chapter 6, pages 113-128, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    16. Suzuki, T. & Talman, A.J.J., 2011. "Solution Concepts for Cooperative Games with Circular Communication Structure," Discussion Paper 2011-100, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    17. van der Brink, R., 1994. "An Axiomatization of the Disjunctive Permission Value for Games with a Permission Structure," Discussion Paper 1994-33, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    18. Alexandre Skoda, 2016. "Convexity of Network Restricted Games Induced by Minimum Partitions," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01305005, HAL.
    19. Debasis Mishra & A. Talman, 2010. "A characterization of the average tree solution for tree games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(1), pages 105-111, March.
    20. C. Manuel & D. Martín, 2021. "A value for communication situations with players having different bargaining abilities," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 301(1), pages 161-182, June.

    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:wut:journl:v:31:y:2021:i:1:p:97-121:id:1563. 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: Adam Kasperski (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iopwrpl.html .

    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.