Voting in Small Committees
AbstractA small committee has to approve/reject a project with uncertain return. Members have different preferences: some are value-maximizers, others are biased towards approval. We focus on the efficient use of scarce information when communication is not guaranteed, and we provide insights on the optimal committee composition. We show that the presence of biased members can improve the voting outcome by simplifying the strategies of unbiased members. Thus, heterogeneous committees perform at least as well as homogeneous committees. In particular, when value-maximizers outnumber biased members by one vote, the optimal equilibrium becomes unique. Finally, allowing members to communicate brings no improvement.
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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by CESifo Group Munich in its series CESifo Working Paper Series with number 3732.
Date of creation: 2012
Date of revision:
voting; small committees; committees composition; communication in committees;
Other versions of this item:
- D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
- D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Renée B. Adams & Daniel Ferreira, 2007. "A Theory of Friendly Boards," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(1), pages 217-250, 02.
- Alan S. Blinder, 2005.
"Monetary Policy by Committee: Why and How?,"
84, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies..
- Paolo Balduzzi & Clara Graziano & Annalisa Luporini, 2011.
"Voting in Corporate Boards with Heterogeneous Preferences,"
CESifo Working Paper Series
3332, CESifo Group Munich.
- Paolo Balduzzi & Clara Graziano & Annalisa Luporini, 2011. "Voting in Corporate Boards with Heterogeneous Preferences," Working Papers - Economics wp2011_02.rdf, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
- Hongbin Cai, 2009. "Costly participation and heterogeneous preferences in informational committees," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(1), pages 173-189.
- Alessandro Riboni & Francisco Ruge-Murcia, 2007.
"Preference heterogeneity in monetary policy committees,"
DNB Working Papers
157, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
- Alessandro Riboni & Francisco J. Ruge-Murcia, 2008. "Preference Heterogeneity in Monetary Policy Committees," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 4(1), pages 213-233, March.
- RIBONI, Alessandro & RUGE-MURCIA, Francisco J., 2007. "Preference Heterogeneity in Monetary Policy Committees," Cahiers de recherche 2007-05, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
- RIBONI, Alessandro & RUGE-MURCIA, Francisco J., 2007. "Preference Heterogeneity in Monetary Policy Committees," Cahiers de recherche 05-2007, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
- Myerson, Roger B., 1998.
"Extended Poisson Games and the Condorcet Jury Theorem,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 111-131, October.
- Roger B. Myerson, 1994. "Extended Poisson Games and the Condorcet Jury Theorem," Discussion Papers 1103, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Jung, Alexander, 2011. "An international comparison of voting by committees," Working Paper Series 1383, European Central Bank.
- Raheja, Charu G., 2005. "Determinants of Board Size and Composition: A Theory of Corporate Boards," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(02), pages 283-306, June.
- Jan Marc Berk & Beata K. Bierut, 2005. "On the Optimality of Decisions made by Hub-and-Spokes Monetary Policy Committees," DNB Working Papers 027, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
- Morton, Rebecca B. & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2011.
"Let the experts decide? Asymmetric information, abstention, and coordination in standing committees,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 485-509, June.
- Rebecca Morton & Jean-Robert Tyran, 2008. "Let the Experts Decide? Asymmetric Information, Abstention, and Coordination in Standing Committees," Discussion Papers 08-25, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
- Piketty, Thomas, 1999. "The information-aggregation approach to political institutions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4-6), pages 791-800, April.
- John Duggan & Cesar Martinelli, 1999.
"A Bayesian Model of Voting in Juries,"
9904, Centro de Investigacion Economica, ITAM.
- Harris, Mark & Spencer, Christopher, 2008.
"Decade of dissent: explaining the dissent voting behavior of Bank of England MPC members,"
9100, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Mark Harris & Paul Levine & Christopher Spencer, 2011. "A decade of dissent: explaining the dissent voting behavior of Bank of England MPC members," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 146(3), pages 413-442, March.
- Wolinsky, Asher, 2002.
"Eliciting information from multiple experts,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 141-160, October.
- Christopher Spencer, 2006. "The Dissent Voting Behaviour of Bank of England MPC Members," School of Economics Discussion Papers 0306, School of Economics, University of Surrey.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Julio Saavedra).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.