Managerial Effort Incentives and Market Collusion
AbstractWe investigate the interactions between managers’ incentives to collude or compete, and incentives to exert effort. A manager privately chooses the competitive strategy of the firm, and his own effort to improve productivity; He may substitute collusion to effort to increase profits. High profit targets — i.e., strong effort incentives — make participating in a cartel more attractive. To answer this double moral hazard, owners may have to give the manager information rents, and to choose inefficient effort levels. This affects cartel sustainability and profitability. Because of reduced internal efficiency, welfare losses may arise even when the industry remains competitive. Antitrust policy has a novel value, specifically thanks to individual sanctions: They foster internal efficiency in competing firms while worsening it in cartelized firms. This improves both efficiency under competition and cartel deterrence. Individual fines are thus more beneficial than corporate fines; criminal sanctions are even more effective. Last, individual leniency programs have ambiguous effects, even when not used in equilibrium.
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 Toulouse School of Economics (TSE) in its series TSE Working Papers with number 09-127.
Date of creation: Dec 2009
Date of revision:
collusion; managerial incentives; leniency programs;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
- K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
- L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2010-05-22 (All new papers)
- NEP-BEC-2010-05-22 (Business Economics)
- NEP-COM-2010-05-22 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-CTA-2010-05-22 (Contract Theory & Applications)
- NEP-IND-2010-05-22 (Industrial Organization)
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.:
- Chaim Fershtman & Kenneth L. Judd & Ehud Kalai, 1990.
"Observable Contracts: Strategic Delegation and Cooperation,"
879, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Fershtman, Chaim & Judd, Kenneth L & Kalai, Ehud, 1991. "Observable Contracts: Strategic Delegation and Cooperation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 32(3), pages 551-59, August.
- Schmidt, Klaus M, 1997.
"Managerial Incentives and Product Market Competition,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(2), pages 191-213, April.
- Schmidt, Klaus M., 1996. "Managerial Incentives and Product Market Competition," CEPR Discussion Papers 1382, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2004. "Divide et Impera: Optimal Leniency Programmes," CEPR Discussion Papers 4840, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Dan Bernhardt & Chris Chambers, .
"Profit Sharing (with workers) Facilitates Collusion (among firms),"
Wallis Working Papers
WP22, University of Rochester - Wallis Institute of Political Economy.
- Dan Bernhardt & Christopher P. Chambers, 2006. "Profit sharing (with workers) facilitates collusion (among firms)," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 483-502, 09.
- Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2004.
"Managerial Incentives and Collusive Behaviour,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
4506, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Zhijun, 2008. "Cartel Organization and Antitrust Enforcement," Working Papers 08-21, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia.
- Rajesh K. Aggarwal & Andrew A. Samwick, 1999.
"Executive Compensation, Strategic Competition, and Relative Performance Evaluation: Theory and Evidence,"
Journal of Finance,
American Finance Association, vol. 54(6), pages 1999-2043, December.
- Rajesh Aggarwal & Andrew A. Samwick, 1996. "Executive Compensation, Strategic Competition, and Relative Performance Evaluation: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 5648, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2000. "Stock-Related Compensation and Product-Market Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(1), pages 22-42, Spring.
- Chaim Fershtman & Kenneth L Judd, 1984.
"Equilibrium Incentives in Oligopoly,"
642, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Motta, Massimo & Polo, Michele, 2000.
"Leniency Programs and Cartel Prosecution,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
2349, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Massimo Motta & Michele Polo, . "Leniency Programs and Cartel Prosecution," Working Papers 150, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
- Motta, M. & Polo, M., 1999. "Leniency Programs and Cartel Prosecution," Economics Working Papers eco99/23, European University Institute.
- Joseph E. Harrington, 2005.
"Optimal Cartel Pricing In The Presence Of An Antitrust Authority,"
International Economic Review,
Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 46(1), pages 145-169, 02.
- Joseph E Harrington, 2001. "Optimal Cartel Pricing in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," Economics Working Paper Archive 460, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised Jul 2002.
- Steven D. Sklivas, 1987. "The Strategic Choice of Managerial Incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(3), pages 452-458, Autumn.
- Aubert, Cecile & Rey, Patrick & Kovacic, William E., 2006. "The impact of leniency and whistle-blowing programs on cartels," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 1241-1266, November.
- Maarten Pieter Schinkel, 2007. "Effective Cartel Enforcement in Europe," Conferences on New Political Economy, in: Max Albert & Stefan Voigt & Dieter Schmidtchen (ed.), Conferences on New Political Economy, edition 1, volume 24, pages 131-170(4 Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen.
- repec:rje:randje:v:37:y:2006:3:p:483-502 is not listed on IDEAS
- Rey, Patrick, 2002. "Towards a Theory of Competition Policy," IDEI Working Papers 121, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
- Aubert, Cécile & Kovacic, William & Rey, Patrick, 2006. "The Impact of Leniency and Whistleblowing Programs on Cartels," Open Access publications from University of Toulouse 1 Capitole http://neeo.univ-tlse1.fr, University of Toulouse 1 Capitole.
- Nathan H. Miller, 2009. "Strategic Leniency and Cartel Enforcement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 750-68, June.
- Fahad Khalil, 1997. "Auditing Without Commitment," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(4), pages 629-640, Winter.
- Oliver D. Hart, 1983. "The Market Mechanism as an Incentive Scheme," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(2), pages 366-382, Autumn.
- Joseph E. Harrington, Jr, 2005. "Optimal Corporate Leniency Programs," Economics Working Paper Archive 527, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics.
- Johannes Paha, 2013. "The Impact of Persistent Shocks and Concave Objective Functions on Collusive Behavior," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201328, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.