IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v130y2021icp591-601.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contract design with socially attentive preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Koch, Simon
  • Weinschenk, Philipp

Abstract

The standard agency model assumes that the agent does not care how his decisions influence others. This is a strong assumption, which we relax. We find that, although monetary incentives are also effective with socially attentive agents, the principal may optimally set none. This could explain the puzzle why empirically only a fraction of employees experiences monetary incentives. Furthermore, in case the agent's type is private information, the principal optimally offers a single pooling contract, i.e., never screens for different types, no matter how rich the set of possible attentiveness levels is and what shape the underlying distribution function has.

Suggested Citation

  • Koch, Simon & Weinschenk, Philipp, 2021. "Contract design with socially attentive preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 591-601.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:130:y:2021:i:c:p:591-601
    DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2021.10.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825621001342
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.geb.2021.10.002?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Englmaier, Florian & Muehlheusser, Gerd & Roider, Andreas, 2010. "Optimal Incentive Contracts under Moral Hazard When the Agent is Free to Leave," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 329, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    2. Kräkel, Matthias, 2016. "Peer effects and incentives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 120-127.
    3. Hideshi Itoh, 2004. "Moral Hazard and Other‐Regarding Preferences," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 55(1), pages 18-45, March.
    4. Non, Arjan, 2012. "Gift-exchange, incentives, and heterogeneous workers," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 319-336.
    5. Gittleman, Maury & Pierce, Brooks, 2013. "How Prevalent is Performance-Related Pay in the United States? Current Incidence and Recent Trends," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 226, pages 4-16, November.
    6. Christoph Engel, 2011. "Dictator games: a meta study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(4), pages 583-610, November.
    7. Freeman, Richard Barry & Bryson, Alex & Lucifora, Claudio & Pellizari, Michele & Perotin, Virginie, 2012. "Paying for Performance: Incentive Pay Schemes and Employees’ Financial Participation," Scholarly Articles 37146963, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    8. Thomas Lemieux & W. Bentley MacLeod & Daniel Parent, 2009. "Performance Pay and Wage Inequality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(1), pages 1-49.
    9. Dominique Demougin & Claude Fluet, 1998. "Mechanism Sufficient Statistic in the Risk-Neutral Agency Problem," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 154(4), pages 622-622, December.
    10. Brenzel, Hanna & Gartner, Hermann & Schnabel, Claus, 2014. "Wage bargaining or wage posting? Evidence from the employers' side," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 41-48.
    11. Timothy Besley & Maitreesh Ghatak, 2005. "Competition and Incentives with Motivated Agents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(3), pages 616-636, June.
    12. Jean Tirole & Roland Bénabou, 2006. "Incentives and Prosocial Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1652-1678, December.
    13. Englmaier, Florian & Wambach, Achim, 2010. "Optimal incentive contracts under inequity aversion," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 312-328, July.
    14. Alex Bryson & Richard Freeman & Claudio Lucifora & Michele Pellizzari & Virginie Perotin, 2012. "Paying for Performance: Incentive Pay Schemes and Employees' Financial Participation," CEP Discussion Papers dp1112, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    15. Delfgaauw, Josse & Dur, Robert, 2007. "Signaling and screening of workers' motivation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 605-624, April.
    16. Lea Cassar & Jesper Armouti-Hansen, 2020. "Optimal Contracting with Endogenous Project Mission [Properties of Scoring Auctions]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(5), pages 2647-2676.
    17. Arce, Daniel G., 2013. "Principals’ preferences for agents with social preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 154-163.
    18. Yeon-Koo Che & Seung-Weon Yoo, 2001. "Optimal Incentives for Teams," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 525-541, June.
    19. Bartling, Björn, 2011. "Relative performance or team evaluation? Optimal contracts for other-regarding agents," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 183-193, August.
    20. James Andreoni & John Miller, 2002. "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 737-753, March.
    21. Anirudha Balasubramanian, 2015. "On weighted utilitarianism and an application," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(4), pages 745-763, April.
    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. Weinschenk, Philipp, 2019. "Contract Design with Socially-Attentive Preferences," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203546, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    2. Roberto Sarkisian, 2021. "Optimal Incentives Schemes under Homo Moralis Preferences," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, March.
    3. Robert Dur & Jan Tichem, 2012. "Social Relations and Relational Incentives," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 12-054/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    4. Livio, Luca & De Chiara, Alessandro, 2019. "Friends or foes? Optimal incentives for reciprocal agents," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 245-278.
    5. Gürtler, Marc & Gürtler, Oliver, 2014. "The interaction of explicit and implicit contracts: A signaling approach," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 135-146.
    6. Robert Dur & Ola Kvaløy & Anja Schöttner, 2022. "Leadership Styles and Labor Market Conditions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 3150-3168, April.
    7. Kragl, Jenny & Bental, Benjamin & Safaynikoo, Peymaneh, 2024. "Incentives and Peer Effects in the Workplace: On the Impact of Envy and Wage Transparency on Organizational Design," VfS Annual Conference 2024 (Berlin): Upcoming Labor Market Challenges 302380, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    8. Roberto Sarkisian, 2017. "Team Incentives under Moral and Altruistic Preferences: Which Team to Choose?," Games, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-24, September.
    9. Ho, Shirley J. & Tsai, Yi Hao, 2020. "Building friendship with Boss: Strategic prosocial behaviors in the agency model," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    10. Dalmia, Prateik & Filiz-Ozbay, Emel, 2021. "Your success is my motivation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 49-85.
    11. Biener, Christian & Eling, Martin & Landmann, Andreas & Pradhan, Shailee, 2018. "Can group incentives alleviate moral hazard? The role of pro-social preferences," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 230-249.
    12. Sarkisian, Roberto, 2017. "Team Incentives under Moral and Altruistic Preferences: Which Team to Choose?," TSE Working Papers 17-838, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    13. Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2018. "Moral hazard: Base models and two extensions," Chapters, in: Luis C. Corchón & Marco A. Marini (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory and Industrial Organization, Volume I, chapter 16, pages 453-485, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Barigozzi, Francesca & Manna, Ester, 2020. "Envy in mission-oriented organisations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 395-424.
    15. Biao Luo & Chengyuan Wang & Tieshan Li, 2018. "Inequity-averse agents’ deserved concerns under the linear contract: a social network setting," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 268(1), pages 129-148, September.
    16. Ester Manna, 2017. "Customer‐oriented employees: Blessing or curse for firms?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 842-875, December.
    17. Robert Dur & Amihai Glazer, 2004. "Optimal Incentive Contracts when Workers envy their Boss," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-046/1, Tinbergen Institute, revised 13 Jun 2006.
    18. Banerjee, Swapnendu & Chakraborty, Somenath, 2023. "Optimal incentive contracts with a spiteful principal: Single agent," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 29-41.
    19. Ishida, Junichiro, 2012. "Contracting with self-esteem concerns," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 329-340.
    20. Imhof, Lorens & Kräkel, Matthias, 2014. "Bonus pools and the informativeness principle," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 180-191.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agency model; Socially attentive preferences; Incentives;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • M52 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Compensation and Compensation Methods and Their Effects

    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:eee:gamebe:v:130:y:2021:i:c:p:591-601. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622836 .

    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.