Endogenous managerial incentive contracts in a differentiated duopoly, with and without commitment
In a differentiated Cournot duopoly, we examine the contracts that firms' owners use to compensate their managers and the resulting output levels, profits and social welfare. If products are either sufficiently differentiated or sufficiently close substitutes, owners use Relative Performance contracts. For intermediate levels of product substitutability, they use Market Share contracts. When owners do not commit over the types of contracts, each type is an owner's best response to his rival's choice. Product substitutability has differential effects on output levels and profits, depending on the configuration of contracts in the industry. Finally, managerial incentive contracts are welfare enhancing if they increase consumers' surplus. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Volume (Year): 31 (2010)
Issue (Month): 8 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976|
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.:
- Thijs Jansen & Arie van Lier & Arjen van Witteloostuijn, 2009. "On the impact of managerial bonus systems on firm profit and market competition: the cases of pure profit, sales, market share and relative profits compared," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(3), pages 141-153.
- Miller, Nolan H. & Pazgal, Amit, 2005. "Strategic trade and delegated competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 215-231, May.
- 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.
- 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.
- Vickers, John, 1985. "Delegation and the Theory of the Firm," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 95(380a), pages 138-47, Supplemen.
- Katz, Michael L., 1991.
"Game-Playing Agents: Unobservable Contracts as Precommitments,"
Department of Economics, Working Paper Series
qt79b870w0, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Michael L. Katz, 1991. "Game-Playing Agents: Unobservable Contracts as Precommitments," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(3), pages 307-328, Autumn.
- Michael L. Katz., 1991. "Game-Playing Agents: Unobservable Contracts as Precommitments," Economics Working Papers 91-172, University of California at Berkeley.
- Levent Kockesen & Efe A. Ok, 2004.
"Strategic Delegation By Unobservable Incentive Contracts,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 397-424, 04.
- Kockesen, L. & Ok, E., 1999. "Strategic Delegation by Unobservable Incentive Contracts," Working Papers 99-11, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
- Ritz, Robert A., 2008. "Strategic incentives for market share," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 586-597, March.
- Robert Gibbons & Kevin J. Murphy, 1990.
"Relative performance evaluation for chief executive officers,"
Industrial and Labor Relations Review,
ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 43(3), pages 30-51, February.
- Robert Gibbons & Kevin J. Murphy, 1989. "Relative Performance Evaluation for Chief Executive Officers," NBER Working Papers 2944, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Gibbons, R. & Murphy, K.J., 1989. "Relative Performance Evaluation For Chief Executive Officers," Working papers 532, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Robert Gibbons & Kevin Murphy, 1989. "Relative Performance Evaluation for Chief Executive Officers," Working Papers 628, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
- Jansen, Thijs & van Lier, Arie & van Witteloostuijn, Arjen, 2007. "A note on strategic delegation: The market share case," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 531-539, June.
- Jensen, M.C. & Murphy, K.J., 1988.
"Performance Pay And Top Management Incentives,"
88-04, Rochester, Business - Managerial Economics Research Center.
- Fershtman, Chaim & Judd, Kenneth L, 1987.
"Equilibrium Incentives in Oligopoly,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 927-40, December.
- Fershtman, Chaim, 1985. "Managerial incentives as a strategic variable in duopolistic environment," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 245-253, June.
- Nolan Miller & Amit Pazgal, 2002. "Relative performance as a strategic commitment mechanism," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 51-68.
- Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Separation of Ownership and Control," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 301-25, June.
- Miller, Nolan H & Pazgal, Amit I, 2001. "The Equivalence of Price and Quantity Competition with Delegation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(2), pages 284-301, Summer.
- Sung Wook Joh, 1999. "Strategic Managerial Incentive Compensation In Japan: Relative Performance Evaluation And Product Market Collusion," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(2), pages 303-313, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:31:y:2010:i:8:p:531-543. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.