IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v76y1986i4p701-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prizes and Incentives in Elimination Tournaments

Author

Listed:
  • Rosen, Sherwin

Abstract

Sequential-elimination career games promote survival-of-the-fittest competitors. However, top prizes must be elevated to provide performance incentives in later stages of the game. The option value of achieving a high rank encourages performance effort in early rounds, but the continuation option plays out toward the finals. Concentrating an extra share of the purse on the top prize replaces the option value of early stage competition and ensures that contestants who have achieved high ranks do not rest of their laurels in attempting to climb higher. Copyright 1986 by American Economic Association.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosen, Sherwin, 1986. "Prizes and Incentives in Elimination Tournaments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 701-715, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:76:y:1986:i:4:p:701-15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-8282%28198609%2976%3A4%3C701%3APAIIET%3E2.0.CO%3B2-U&origin=repec
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Green, Jerry R & Stokey, Nancy L, 1983. "A Comparison of Tournaments and Contracts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(3), pages 349-364, June.
    2. Bengt Holmstrom, 1982. "Moral Hazard in Teams," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(2), pages 324-340, Autumn.
    3. Malcomson, James M, 1984. "Work Incentives, Hierarchy, and Internal Labor Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 92(3), pages 486-507, June.
    4. Glenn C. Loury, 1979. "Market Structure and Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 93(3), pages 395-410.
    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. John A. List & Daan van Soest & Jan Stoop & Haiwen Zhou, 2020. "On the Role of Group Size in Tournaments: Theory and Evidence from Laboratory and Field Experiments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(10), pages 4359-4377, October.
    2. Imhof, Lorens & Kräkel, Matthias, 2014. "Bonus pools and the informativeness principle," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 180-191.
    3. Ola Kvaløy & Trond E. Olsen, 2006. "Team Incentives in Relational Employment Contracts," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(1), pages 139-170, January.
    4. Matthias Kräkel, 2006. "Splitting Leagues," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 88(1), pages 21-48, June.
    5. Kvaløy, Ola & Olsen, Trond E., 2008. "Relative performance evaluation, agent hold-up and firm organization," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 229-241, June.
    6. repec:eee:labchp:v:3:y:1999:i:pb:p:2373-2437 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Ola Kvaløy & Trond E. Olsen, 2012. "The Rise of Individual Performance Pay," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 493-518, June.
    8. P.-J. Jost & M. Kräkel, 2005. "Preemptive behavior in sequential-move tournaments with heterogeneous agents," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 245-252, November.
    9. Alexander K. Koch & Eloïc Peyrache, 2011. "Aligning Ambition and Incentives," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 655-688.
    10. Matthias Kräkel, 2002. "U-Type versus J-Type Tournaments," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 158(4), pages 614-637, December.
    11. Kohei Daido & Takeshi Murooka, 2016. "Team Incentives and Reference‐Dependent Preferences," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(4), pages 958-989, December.
    12. Edward P. Lazear & Paul Oyer, 2012. "Personnel Economics," Introductory Chapters, in: Robert Gibbons & John Roberts (ed.),The Handbook of Organizational Economics, Princeton University Press.
    13. Edward P. Lazear, 1995. "Personnel Economics," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121883, February.
    14. John List & Daan Van Soest & Jan Stoop & Haiwen Zhou, 2014. "On the Role of Group Size in Tournaments: Theory and Evidence from Lab and Field Experiments," NBER Working Papers 20008, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Hitoshi Matsushima, 2010. "Role Of Relative And Absolute Performance Evaluations In Intergroup Competition," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 61(4), pages 443-454, December.
    16. Gilbert, Richard J. & Katz, Michael L., 2011. "Efficient division of profits from complementary innovations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 443-454, July.
    17. Gill, David & Stone, Rebecca, 2010. "Fairness and desert in tournaments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 346-364, July.
    18. Lazear, Edward P, 1984. "Incentives and Wage Rigidity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 339-344, May.
    19. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro, 2008. "Competition and Truth in the Market for News," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(2), pages 133-154, Spring.
    20. Budde, Jörg, 2005. "Information in tournaments under limited liability," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers 21/2005, University of Bonn, Bonn Graduate School of Economics (BGSE).
    21. Krakel, Matthias, 2003. "U-type versus J-type tournaments as alternative solutions to the unverifiability problem," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 359-380, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:aea:aecrev:v:76:y:1986:i:4:p:701-15. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael P. Albert). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.