IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Insider Privatisation and Restructuring Incentives

  • Philipp Schröder

    ()

In the literature on privatisation and restructuring it is a generally held belief that manager owned firms will be restructured more rigorously than worker owned companies. This gives the clear recommendation that property rights and control rights should be allocated to managers in the process of (insider-) privatisation. One of the implied arguments is, that managers' career concerns will make them eager to prove their ability by improving company efficiency. The present model shows that in the transition context managers' career concerns might result in the opposite effect. If the bulk of job opportunities are in worker controlled firms, the managers of the few manager controlled firms will want to appear soft on excess labour capacity – hence, restructure less harshly – in order to improve their career opportunities. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

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.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/B:ECOP.0000038298.15221.14
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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.

Article provided by Springer in its journal Economics of Planning.

Volume (Year): 36 (2003)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
Pages: 333-349

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:kap:ecopln:v:36:y:2003:i:4:p:333-349
DOI: 10.1023/B:ECOP.0000038298.15221.14
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springer.com

Order Information: Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/development/journal/10644/PS2

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.:

as in new window
  1. Cauley, Jon & Cornes, Richard & Sandler, Todd, 1999. "Stakeholder Incentives and Reforms in China's State-Owned Enterprises: A Common-Property Theory," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1670, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  2. J Earle & S Estrin & L Leshchenko, 1996. "Ownership Structures," CEP Discussion Papers dp0315, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  3. Roland, Gérard & Sekkat, Khalid, 1996. "Managerial Career Concerns, Privatization and Restructuring in Transition Economies," CEPR Discussion Papers 1363, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  4. Schroder, Philipp J. H., 2001. "On the speed and boundaries of structural adjustment when fiscal policy is tight," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 345-364, December.
  5. L.M. Freinkman & I. Starodubrovskaya, 1996. "Restructuring of Enterprise Social Assets in Russia: Trends, Problems, Possible Solutions," Working Papers wp96052, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
  6. Claessens, Stijn & Djankov, Simeon, 1999. "Enterprise performance and management turnover in the Czech Republic," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4-6), pages 1115-1124, April.
  7. Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1994. "Politicians and Firms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 109(4), pages 995-1025.
  8. Wendy Carlin & Philippe Aghion, 1996. "Restructuring outcomes and the evolution of ownership patterns in Central and Eastern Europe," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 4(2), pages 371-388, October.
  9. Wright, Peter & Mukherji, Ananda, 1999. "Inside the firm: Socioeconomic versus agency perspectives on firm competitiveness," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 295-307.
  10. Thompson, Steve & Wright, Mike, 1995. "Corporate Governance: The Role of Restructuring Transactions," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(430), pages 690-703, May.
  11. Estrin, Saul & Rosevear, Adam, 1999. "Enterprise performance and ownership: The case of Ukraine," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4-6), pages 1125-1136, April.
  12. Simeon Djankov & Peter Murrell, 2002. "Enterprise Restructuring in Transition: A Quantitative Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 739-792, September.
  13. Hart, Oliver, 1995. "Corporate Governance: Some Theory and Implications," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(430), pages 678-89, May.
  14. Aghion, Philippe & Blanchard, Olivier & Burgess, Robin, 1994. "The behaviour of state firms in eastern Europe, pre-privatisation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 1327-1349, June.
  15. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1994. "The Firm as an Incentive System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 972-91, September.
  16. Igor Filatotchev & Michael Bleaney & Mike Wright, 1999. "Insider-controlled Firms in Russia," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 129-151, May.
  17. Josef C. Brada, 1996. "Privatization Is Transition--Or Is It?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 67-86, Spring.
  18. M Belka & S Estrin & M Schaffer & I.J. Singh, 1995. "Enterprise Adjustment in Poland: Evidence from a Survey of 200 Private," CEP Discussion Papers dp0233, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:ecopln:v:36:y:2003:i:4:p:333-349. 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: (Sonal Shukla)

or (Rebekah McClure)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.