Collusion under yardstick competition: an experimental study
The effectiveness of relative performance evaluation schemes, such as yardstick competition, can be undermined by collusion.The degree to which the regulated agents manage to collude will be affected by the particulars of the scheme.We hypothesize that in a repeated game setting schemes will be more prone to collusion the smaller are the rents to the agents in case they behave non-cooperatively.We illustrate the relevance of this hypothesis by means of an economic experiment in which we compare the efficiency of two performance evaluation schemes.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
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.:
- Huck, Steffen & Normann, Hans-Theo & Oechssler, Jorg, 2000.
"Does information about competitors' actions increase or decrease competition in experimental oligopoly markets?,"
International Journal of Industrial Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 39-57, January.
- Steffen Huck & Hans-Theo Normann & Joerg Oechssler, 1998. "Does information about competitors' actions increase or decrease competition in experimental oligopoly markets?," Industrial Organization 9803004, EconWPA.
- Offerman, T.J.S. & Potters, J.J.M. & Sonnemans, J., 2002.
"Imitation and belief learning in an oligopoly experiment,"
Other publications TiSEM
a6a771c5-31ba-4193-8f76-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
- Theo Offerman & Jan Potters & Joep Sonnemans, 2002. "Imitation and Belief Learning in an Oligopoly Experiment," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(4), pages 973-997.
- Theo Offerman & Jan Potters & Joep Sonnemans, 1997. "Imitation and Belief Learning in an Oligopoly Experiment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 97-116/1, Tinbergen Institute.
- Bengt Holmstrom, 1981.
"Moral Hazard in Teams,"
471, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Laffont, J.J. & Martimort, D., 1995.
"Collusion and Delegation,"
95.397, Toulouse - GREMAQ.
- Friedman, James W, 1971.
"A Noncooperative View of Oligopoly,"
International Economic Review,
Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 12(1), pages 106-122, February.
- Clark, Kenneth & Sefton, Martin, 2001. "Repetition and signalling: experimental evidence from games with efficient equilibria," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 357-362, March.
- Jean-Jacques Laffont & David Martimort, 1997.
"Collusion under Asymmetric Information,"
Econometric Society, vol. 65(4), pages 875-912, July.
- Andrei Shleifer, 1985. "A Theory of Yardstick Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(3), pages 319-327, Autumn.
- Lazear, Edward P & Rosen, Sherwin, 1981.
"Rank-Order Tournaments as Optimum Labor Contracts,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(5), pages 841-864, October.
- Reinhard Selten & Michael Mitzkewitz & Gerald R. Uhlich, 1997.
"Duopoly Strategies Programmed by Experienced Players,"
Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 517-556, May.
- Selten,Reinhard & Mitzkewitz,Michael & Uhlich,Gerald, "undated". "Duopoly strategies programmed by experienced players," Discussion Paper Serie B 106, University of Bonn, Germany.
- repec:sae:ilrrev:v:43:y:1990:i:3:p:30-51 is not listed on IDEAS
- Dilip Mookherjee, 1984. "Optimal Incentive Schemes with Many Agents," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(3), pages 433-446.
- Robert Gibbons & Kevin J. Murphy, 1990. "Relative Performance Evaluation for Chief Executive Officers," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 43(3), pages 30, April.
- Claudia Keser & Frans A.A.M. van Winden, 2000. "Conditional Cooperation and Voluntary Contributions to Public Goods," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 00-011/1, Tinbergen Institute.
- Tangerås, Thomas P., 1999.
"Collusion-Proof Yardstick Competition,"
674, Stockholm University, Institute for International Economic Studies.
- Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1991. "Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061414.
- Selten, Reinhard & Stoecker, Rolf, 1986. "End behavior in sequences of finite Prisoner's Dilemma supergames A learning theory approach," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 47-70, March.
- Keser, Claudia & van Winden, Frans, 2000. " Conditional Cooperation and Voluntary Contributions to Public Goods," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 102(1), pages 23-39, March.
- Dye, Ronald A, 1984. "The Trouble with Tournaments," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 22(1), pages 147-149, January.
- Nalebuff, Barry J & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1983. "Information, Competition, and Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(2), pages 278-283, May.
- Joel Sobel, 1999. "A Reexamination of Yardstick Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(1), pages 33-60, 03.
- Huck, Steffen & Normann, Hans-Theo & Oechssler, Jorg, 1999.
"Learning in Cournot Oligopoly--An Experiment,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(454), pages 80-95, March.
- Abbink, Klaus & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 1995. "RatImage - research Assistance Toolbox for Computer-Aided Human Behavior Experiments," Discussion Paper Serie B 325, University of Bonn, Germany.
- Croson, Rachel T. A., 1996. "Partners and strangers revisited," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 25-32, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:22:y:2004:i:7:p:1017-1038. 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: (Shamier, Wendy)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.