This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Inter-temporal Cost Allocation and Managerial Investment Incentives

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
William P. Rogerson
Abstract

This paper provides a formal analysis of how managerial investment incentives are affected by alternative allocation rules when managerial compensation is based on accounting measure of income which include allocations for investment expenditures. The major result is that a unique allocation rule exists, called the relative marginal benefits (RAB) rule, which always induces the manager to choose the efficient investment, no matter how the manager values his own personal cash flows from wage compensation over time and no matter what wage schedule is in place (so long as wages are weakly increeasing each period's income). That is, the same allocation rule works for every possible managerial utility function over wage payments and every monotone wage function over accounting incomes. Thus the firm can choose an allocation rule which induces efficient investment choices without knowing the manager's preferences. Furthermore, since the same rule works for every monotone wage schedule, the firm is left a "degree of freedom" to choose the wage schedule to solve some other incentive problem. In addition to demonstrating the optimality of the RMB rule and describing its properties, the paper considers how currently used allocation rules qualitatively affect managers' investment incentives. It is shown that the practice of expensing intangible assets (i.e., allocating 100 percent of the cost to the current perios) causes mangers to underinvest relative to the efficient level. The case of tangible assets is more complicated. It appears that current practices may cause either underinvestment or overinvestment, depending on various factor described in more detail in the text.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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.

File URL: http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/research/math/papers/1060.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function: main text
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science in its series Discussion Papers with number 1060.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Sep 1993
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:nwu:cmsems:1060

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science, Northwestern University, 580 Jacobs Center, 2001 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208-2014
Phone: 847/491-3527
Fax: 847/491-2530
Email:
Web page: http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/research/math/
More information through EDIRC

Order Information:
Email:

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Fran Walker).

Related research
Keywords:

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

  1. Ingo Vogelsang & Jorg Finsinger, 1979. "A Regulatory Adjustment Process for Optimal Pricing by Multiproduct Monopoly Firms," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 157-171, Spring. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. David Sappington, 1980. "Strategic Firm Behavior under a Dynamic Regulatory Adjustment Process," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(1), pages 360-372, Spring. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Rogerson, William P, 1992. "Optimal Depreciation Schedules for Regulated Utilities," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-33, March.
  4. Sappington, David E M & Sibley, David S, 1988. "Regulating without Cost Information: The Incremental Surplus Subsidy Scheme," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 29(2), pages 297-306, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Braeutigam, Ronald R., 1993. "A regulatory bargain for diversified enterprises," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. David Sibley, 1989. "Asymmetric Information, Incentives and Price-Cap Regulation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(3), pages 392-404, Autumn. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Ronald R. Braeutigam & John C. Panzar, 1989. "Diversification Incentives under "Price-Based" and "Cost-Based" Regulation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(3), pages 373-391, Autumn. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Loeb, Martin & Magat, Wesley A, 1979. "A Decentralized Method for Utility Regulation," Journal of Law & Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(2), pages 399-404, October.
  9. George Sweeney, 1982. "Welfare Implications of Fully Distributed Cost Pricing Applied to Partially Regulated Firms," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(2), pages 525-533, Autumn. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? There are over 21000 authors registered on RePEc Author Service.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-21.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.